On 03/31/2014 06:02 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote:
> What is the criteria for this? The OpenDaylight Jenkins has been
> reliably voting for a few weeks now, I'm wondering how and when we can
> get it's voting rights approved.
>
> Thanks!
> Kyle
>
> ___
> OpenS
What is the criteria for this? The OpenDaylight Jenkins has been
reliably voting for a few weeks now, I'm wondering how and when we can
get it's voting rights approved.
Thanks!
Kyle
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http:/
Fellow developers,
I just put together a wiki describing the Arista Third Party Setup.
In the attached document we provide a link to the modified Gerrit Plugin to
handle the regex matching for the "Comment Added" event so that
"recheck/reverify no bug/" can be handled.
https://wiki.openstack.
2014 9:32 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testing] Which patchset
triggered the test
Have a question regarding the Jenkins/Gerrit setup for third party testing
setups.
When Jenkins get triggered by a patchset through the
On Mon, 2014-01-20 at 14:26 -0500, Mohammad Banikazemi wrote:
> Have a question regarding the Jenkins/Gerrit setup for third party
> testing setups.
>
> When Jenkins get triggered by a patchset through the Gerrit trigger
> plug-in, you can execute a set of shell scripts. How do you get the
> infor
usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testing] Which patchset
triggered the test
Have a question regarding the Jenkins/Gerrit setup for third party testing
setups.
When Jenkins get triggered by a patchset through the Gerrit trigger plug-in,
you can execute a set of
Have a question regarding the Jenkins/Gerrit setup for third party testing
setups.
When Jenkins get triggered by a patchset through the Gerrit trigger
plug-in, you can execute a set of shell scripts. How do you get the
information about the patchset that triggered the test? In particular, in
your
Jay Pipes wrote on 01/17/2014 04:32:55 PM:
> From: Jay Pipes
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> ,
> Date: 01/17/2014 04:37 PM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testing] Sharing
> information
>
>
On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 15:37 +, Sullivan, Jon Paul wrote:
> > From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
> > On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 10:39 +, Sullivan, Jon Paul wrote:
> > > > From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mest...@siliconloons.com]
> > > >
> > > > FYI, here [1] are the meeting logs from today’s
Apologies for an almost duplicate post, I corrected the mistake in the example.
Ooops.
> -Original Message-
> From: Sullivan, Jon Paul
> Sent: 16 January 2014 15:38
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutro
> From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com]
> On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 10:39 +, Sullivan, Jon Paul wrote:
> > > From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mest...@siliconloons.com]
> > >
> > > FYI, here [1] are the meeting logs from today’s meeting.
> > >
> > > A couple of things have become apparent here:
>
From: Mohammad Banikazemi [mailto:m...@us.ibm.com]
"Sullivan, Jon Paul" mailto:jonpaul.sulli...@hp.com>>
wrote on 01/16/2014 05:39:04 AM:
>
> I can't recommend Jenkins Job Builder highly enough if you use Jenkins.
>
> [2] https://github.com/openstack-infra/jenkins-job-builder
>
Thanks for th
"Sullivan, Jon Paul" wrote on 01/16/2014 05:39:04
AM:
> From: "Sullivan, Jon Paul"
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> ,
> Date: 01/16/2014 05:46 AM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testi
sharing information about
> > setting up 3rd party testing (as well as multi-node testing) [1] seems
> > to have not been updated recently. Would those who have setup their 3rd
> > party testing successfully be willing to share more information as to
> > what they have done a
> -Original Message-
> From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mest...@siliconloons.com]
> Sent: 15 January 2014 22:53
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testing] Sharing
> information
>
&g
matter?
>>>> (Kyle, I am sure you are busy so I took the liberty to send this note.
>>>> Please let us know what you think.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Mohammad
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1] https:/
party testing (as well as multi-node testing) [1] seems to have
>>>>>> not been updated recently. Would those who have setup their 3rd party
>>>>>> testing successfully be willing to share more information as to what
>>>>>> they have
be willing to share more information as to what they
> have done and possibly update the etherpad?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Would it be of value to others if we have another IRC meeting to
> discuss this matter?
> >>>>> (Kyle, I am sure you
t;>>>
>>>>> Would it be of value to others if we have another IRC meeting to discuss
>>>>> this matter?
>>>>> (Kyle, I am sure you are busy so I took the liberty to send this note.
>>>>> Please let us know what you think.)
>>>&g
>>>> this matter?
>>>> (Kyle, I am sure you are busy so I took the liberty to send this note.
>>>> Please let us know what you think.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Mohammad
>>>>
>>>>
>>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Mohammad
> >>
> >>
> >> [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/multi-node-neutron-tempest
> >>
> >> Kyle Mestery ---12/19/2013 09:17:44 AM---Apologies folks, I
> >> meant 2200 UTC Thursday. We
t; Kyle Mestery ---12/19/2013 09:17:44 AM---Apologies folks,
> I meant 2200 UTC Thursday. We'll still do the meeting today.
> >>
> >> From:Kyle Mestery
> >> To:"OpenStack Development Mailing List \(not for usage questions\)"
> ,
> >> Date:
; >>
> >> [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/multi-node-neutron-tempest
> >>
> >> Kyle Mestery ---12/19/2013 09:17:44 AM---Apologies folks,
> I meant 2200 UTC Thursday. We'll still do the meeting today.
> >>
> >> From:Kyle Mestery
>
Sounds good. Thanks.
Mohammad
From: Kyle Mestery
To: Mohammad Banikazemi/Watson/IBM@IBMUS,
Cc: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
Date: 01/14/2014 09:31 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testin
penstack.org/p/multi-node-neutron-tempest
>>
>> Kyle Mestery ---12/19/2013 09:17:44 AM---Apologies folks, I
>> meant 2200 UTC Thursday. We'll still do the meeting today.
>>
>> From:Kyle Mestery
>> To:"OpenStack Development Mailing List \(not for
yle Mestery ---12/19/2013 09:17:44 AM---Apologies folks, I
> meant 2200 UTC Thursday. We'll still do the meeting today.
>
> From: Kyle Mestery
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List \(not for usage questions\)"
> ,
> Date: 12/19/2013 09:17 AM
> Subject:
tions
\)" ,
Date: 12/19/2013 09:17 AM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testing] Reminder:
Meeting tomorrow
Apologies folks, I meant 2200 UTC Thursday. We'll still do the
meeting today.
On Dec 18, 2013, at 4:40 PM, Don Kehn wrote:
> Wouldn't
Hi Hemanth,
I think that the only job that needs to be integrated with gate tests and
vote is the one running tempest smoketests, which are plugin agnostic.
For tests specific to a given controller, they can surely be integrated
with upstream gerrit in order to vote on changes specific to the plug
Hi,
We are developing a neutron plugin that works with our network controller.
Do we need to have 2 sets of tests for the plugin
i) tests that can be run against the network controller in our third party
test setup (to vote on changes to the plugin)
ii) tests that can be run in the OpenStack test
: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party-testing] Reminder: Meeting
tomorrow
Hi,
I'm sorry I could not make it to meeting.
However, I can see clearly see the progress being made from gerrit!
One thing which might be worth mentioning is that some of the new jobs are
already voting.
However, in
Hi,
I'm sorry I could not make it to meeting.
However, I can see clearly see the progress being made from gerrit!
One thing which might be worth mentioning is that some of the new jobs are
already voting.
However, in some cases the logs are either not accessible, and in other
cases the job seem t
Apologies folks, I meant 2200 UTC Thursday. We'll still do the
meeting today.
On Dec 18, 2013, at 4:40 PM, Don Kehn wrote:
> Wouldn't 2200 UTC be in about 20 mins?
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Itsuro ODA wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems the meeting was not held on 2200 UTC on Wednesday (t
Wouldn't 2200 UTC be in about 20 mins?
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 3:32 PM, Itsuro ODA wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems the meeting was not held on 2200 UTC on Wednesday (today).
>
> Do you mean 2200 UTC on Thursday ?
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:43:03 -0600
> Kyle Mestery wrote:
>
> > Hi every
Hi,
It seems the meeting was not held on 2200 UTC on Wednesday (today).
Do you mean 2200 UTC on Thursday ?
Thanks.
On Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:43:03 -0600
Kyle Mestery wrote:
> Hi everyone:
>
> We had a meeting around Neutron Third-Party testing today on IRC.
> The logs are available here [1]. We
Just a reminder, we'll be meeting at 2200 UTC on #openstack-meeting-alt.
We'll be looking at this etherpad [1] again, and continuing discussions from
last week.
Thanks!
Kyle
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/multi-node-neutron-tempest
___
OpenStack-
Hi everyone:
We had a meeting around Neutron Third-Party testing today on IRC.
The logs are available here [1]. We plan to host another meeting
next week, and it will be at 2200 UTC on Wednesday in the
#openstack-meeting-alt channel on IRC. Please attend and update
the etherpad [2] with any items
2013/12/11 Salvatore Orlando :
> Hi Yoshihiro,
>
> In my opinion the use of filters on changes is allowed by the smoketesting
> policy we defined.
> Notwithstanding that the approach of testing every patch is definitely the
> safest, I understand in some cases the volume of patchsets uploaded to
>
Hi Salvatore,
Thank you for your reply.
2013/12/11 Salvatore Orlando :
> Hi Yoshihiro,
>
> In my opinion the use of filters on changes is allowed by the smoketesting
> policy we defined.
> Notwithstanding that the approach of testing every patch is definitely the
> safest, I understand in some ca
Hi Yoshihiro,
In my opinion the use of filters on changes is allowed by the smoketesting
policy we defined.
Notwithstanding that the approach of testing every patch is definitely the
safest, I understand in some cases the volume of patchsets uploaded to
gerrit might overwhelm the plugin-specific t
2013/12/10 Matt Riedemann :
>
>
> On Sunday, December 08, 2013 11:32:50 PM, Yoshihiro Kaneko wrote:
>>
>> Hi Neutron team,
>>
>> I'm working on building Third-party testing for Neutron Ryu plugin.
>> I intend to use Jenkins and gerrit-trigger plugin.
>>
>> It is required that Third-party testing pr
On Sunday, December 08, 2013 11:32:50 PM, Yoshihiro Kaneko wrote:
Hi Neutron team,
I'm working on building Third-party testing for Neutron Ryu plugin.
I intend to use Jenkins and gerrit-trigger plugin.
It is required that Third-party testing provides verify vote for
all changes to a plugin/dr
Hi Neutron team,
I'm working on building Third-party testing for Neutron Ryu plugin.
I intend to use Jenkins and gerrit-trigger plugin.
It is required that Third-party testing provides verify vote for
all changes to a plugin/driver's code, and all code submissions
by the jenkins user.
https://wik
42 matches
Mail list logo
