Re: [openstack-dev] Gate / Check jobs fail fast mode - don't start tempest until docs/pep8/unittests pass?

2013-12-06 Thread Sean Dague
I actually don't, for the reasons Clark brought up. All this does is optimizes for people that don't run unit tests locally, and make all the jobs take longer. Everything except the tempest jobs should be easy to run locally. So this would effectively penalize the people that do the right thing,

Re: [openstack-dev] Gate / Check jobs fail fast mode - don't start tempest until docs/pep8/unittests pass?

2013-12-05 Thread Christopher Yeoh
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Clark Boylan clark.boy...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Peter Portante peter.a.porta...@gmail.com wrote: Has anybody considered changing how check and gate jobs work such that the tempest and grenade checks only run once the

Re: [openstack-dev] Gate / Check jobs fail fast mode - don't start tempest until docs/pep8/unittests pass?

2013-12-05 Thread Christopher Yeoh
On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:15 AM, Sergey Lukjanov slukja...@mirantis.comwrote: Why developers need to wait for other jobs? Zuul shows current progress well. They don't need to wait, but it would free up resources for other jobs that might pass to get tested earlier. On Friday, December 6,

Re: [openstack-dev] Gate / Check jobs fail fast mode - don't start tempest until docs/pep8/unittests pass?

2013-12-05 Thread Michael Still
I like this idea. Michael On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Peter Portante peter.a.porta...@gmail.com wrote: Has anybody considered changing how check and gate jobs work such that the tempest and grenade checks only run once the docs/pep8/unittests jobs all succeed? It seems like they

Re: [openstack-dev] Gate / Check jobs fail fast mode - don't start tempest until docs/pep8/unittests pass?

2013-12-05 Thread Clark Boylan
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Christopher Yeoh cbky...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Clark Boylan clark.boy...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Peter Portante peter.a.porta...@gmail.com wrote: Has anybody considered changing how check and gate jobs work