Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] [ceph] Puppet Ceph CI

I finally got around to split the RGW test into 3 steps: 1) mons/osds/keys 2) rgw/apache 3) keystone and got the tests for that to pass on Ubuntu. But it seems there is new EPEL dependency issue since yesterday: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/252664/ David, maybe you wan't to rebase your

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] [ceph] Puppet Ceph CI

I pushed an overly optimistic review [1] for updating Openstack to Liberty. Haven't had the time to look back at it yet. The general idea was to defer the repository setup to openstack_extras and pull in the keystone setup mostly as-is directly from puppet-openstack-integration. [1]:

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] [ceph] Puppet Ceph CI

So from the discussion I gather we should do the following: - Update the jobs to run Infernalis - Split the RGW jobs into smaller chunks where one tests just the RGW and another one tests Keystone integration - Use Liberty (or at least Kilo) for the Keystone integration job - Split the tests

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] [ceph] Puppet Ceph CI

Hi David, On 02/12/2015 11:45, David Gurtner wrote: > So from the discussion I gather we should do the following: > > - Update the jobs to run Infernalis > - Split the RGW jobs into smaller chunks where one tests just the RGW and > another one tests Keystone integration > - Use Liberty (or at

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] [ceph] Puppet Ceph CI

Hey Adam, A bit late here, sorry. Ceph works fine with OpenStack Kilo but at the time we developed the integration tests for puppet-ceph with Kilo, there were some issues specific to our test implementation and we chose to settle with Juno at the time. On the topic of CI, I can no longer sponsor

[openstack-dev] [puppet] [ceph] Puppet Ceph CI

I think I have a good lead on the recent failures in openstack / swift / radosgw integration component that we have since disabled. It looks like there is a oslo.config version upgrade conflict in the Juno repo we where using for CentOS. I think moving to Kilo will help sort this out, but at the

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] [ceph] Puppet Ceph CI

Last I remember, David Gurtner tried to use Kilo instead of Juno but he bumped into some problems and we settled for Juno at the time [1]. At this point we should already be testing against both Liberty and Infernalis, we're overdue for an upgrade in that regard. But, yes, +1 to split acceptance

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet] [ceph] Puppet Ceph CI

I'm confused, what is the context here? We use Ceph with OpenStack Kilo without issue. On Nov 23, 2015 2:28 PM, "David Moreau Simard" wrote: > Last I remember, David Gurtner tried to use Kilo instead of Juno but > he bumped into some problems and we settled for Juno at the time

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet][ceph] puppet-ceph CI status

On 06/29/2015 11:16 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: Ah, I don't have +2 on that repo, but the lgtm so your original plan is fine. On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Matt Fischer m...@mattfischer.com mailto:m...@mattfischer.com wrote: I can take a look at these tonight. Maybe also Clayton can

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet][ceph] puppet-ceph CI status

I merged the https://review.openstack.org/#/c/197302/ as we had agreed that once we had enough +1's on the EL7 review we would merge it. The Puppet4 spec tests had already been approved. -- David Moreau Simard Cloud Engineering | Operations On 2015-06-30 07:06 PM, Andrew Woodward wrote: On

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet][ceph] puppet-ceph CI status

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 6:28 AM Emilien Macchi emil...@redhat.com wrote: On 06/29/2015 11:16 PM, Matt Fischer wrote: Ah, I don't have +2 on that repo, but the lgtm so your original plan is fine. On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Matt Fischer m...@mattfischer.com

[openstack-dev] [puppet][ceph] puppet-ceph CI status

Hi Recent changes in the puppet modules infra left stackforge/puppet-ceph CI broken. We've resolved the issues in [1][2] However we are short on non-involved core-reviewers. I propose that we leave the patchs open through Wednesday and use lazy consensus and merge it if we don't receive any

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet][ceph] puppet-ceph CI status

Ah, I don't have +2 on that repo, but the lgtm so your original plan is fine. On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Matt Fischer m...@mattfischer.com wrote: I can take a look at these tonight. Maybe also Clayton can review them? Neither of us were involved in the patches to my knowledge. On Jun

Re: [openstack-dev] [puppet][ceph] puppet-ceph CI status

I can take a look at these tonight. Maybe also Clayton can review them? Neither of us were involved in the patches to my knowledge. On Jun 29, 2015 5:09 PM, Andrew Woodward xar...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Recent changes in the puppet modules infra left stackforge/puppet-ceph CI broken. We've