Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 2014-01-02 10:28:24 -0500 (-0500), Sean Dague wrote: [...] > So lets go after the real problem, selecting subsets of reviews, which > is really a gerrit problem (made worse because we are on an ancient > gerrit. 2.4 is really no longer suitable). [...] So the real > solution is gerrit upgrade, which is currently held up on the WIP > patch. But I think we're getting to the point where we need to > decide if that one feature is worth holding up all the rest of the > features that we are missing that would help with our review > overload problem. And just to follow up with a pointer to the corresponding Infra ML thread... http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-infra/2014-January/000596.html We have a very large code review system with lots of moving parts (many of whom are the hundreds of developers and reviewers interacting with it on a daily basis). There are quite a few of us actively working on the upgrade, and WiP isn't really a blocker at this stage. We're mostly just wanting to make sure we iron out the other hairy bits for upgrading from 2.4.x to 2.8 (or 2.9) and would like to reduce the disruption for our community to an absolute minimum... thus much testing is still outstanding even though we think we've (mostly) ironed out the remaining issues. -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 12/24/2013 01:47 AM, Yair Fried wrote: > Hi, > Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages the same way > you do your mails in the mailing list > > Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple Openstack > project we have a very diverse collection of patches as well as reviewers. > Tagging our commit messages will allow us to classify patches and thus: > 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of expertise > 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in Neutron > testing for example, but can we assess how many network related patches are > for awaiting review > 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches > > You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by then - > you've spent time on a patch you might not even be qualified to review. > I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we are > looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and that reviewers > should -1 untagged patches. > > I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: > > == > Example commit message > > [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] > > Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova > Network performance > > Chang-id XXX > === > > I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? So I'm picking up this thread again to explain my objections further now that it's not vacation. The issue is making it easier for reviewers to care only about a subset of of the tree. Which I see as being useful. The problem is, how do you handle that. Git commit message is something we live with forever, and is something that requires code originators to get tagging right. We can't even get people consistently tagging email threads, so doing this with commit messages doesn't seem to be a winning battle. And doing it with an ever evolving list of tags means it ends up just becoming line noise in our change history. So lets go after the real problem, selecting subsets of reviews, which is really a gerrit problem (made worse because we are on an ancient gerrit. 2.4 is really no longer suitable). Gerrit has the ability to put watches on file regex for watched projects (though only for email, because it's an expensive query). Gerrit 2.5 implemented the ability to put UnifiedDiffs in the emails, which if we did on New Change emails would let you build client side filtering to flag for directories or files that you have. Gerrit 2.8 implemented *secondary indexes* which means the file regex can be made available via the web UI. So the real solution is gerrit upgrade, which is currently held up on the WIP patch. But I think we're getting to the point where we need to decide if that one feature is worth holding up all the rest of the features that we are missing that would help with our review overload problem. -Sean -- Sean Dague Samsung Research America s...@dague.net / sean.da...@samsung.com http://dague.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 2013-12-30 22:46:24 -0500 (-0500), David Kranz wrote: > Looks like 2.8 came out recently and fixes this. It is mentioned > near the top of http://ostrovsky.org/gerrit-code-review-2-8-released/. Awesome! > Is there a planned time to upgrade? It's a priority, but the upgrade process is still being tested and kinks worked out for our data. The transition also depends on additional patches/plugins at the moment, and the new version brings changes in features which will are likely to be somewhat disruptive (so we want to find ways to minimize that). I don't believe there's a strict timeline or schedule for it at this point, but it is definitely being worked on. -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On Dec 30, 2013, at 11:32 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2013-12-30 10:25:07 -0500 (-0500), David Kranz wrote: >> I get that but it seems like this is a single field per gerrit user. >> Is that not true? If true, it is not useful because the point is >> that we want to be able to filter reviews that contain changes to >> tests for a particular project. I need to make different kinds of >> requests, like with a bookmark for each one. Is it possible? > > Right, the file filter parameter is really only effective for > determining what changes Gerrit E-mails you about, or which ones > should be incorporated into your list of watched changes. It's not > available for general search queries (I suspect this was a > compromise made for efficiency reasons since the queries could be > pretty intense the way file information is stored in the underlying > database). > > Note, we're still running Gerrit 2.4 at the moment, so once we > transition to 2.8 or 2.9 the flexibility in the search interface may > increase significantly (I've heard it gives you the ability to > bookmark various searches as custom dashboard views, but not sure > what other search improvements may be added there). > -- > Jeremy Stanley > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev Looks like 2.8 came out recently and fixes this. It is mentioned near the top of http://ostrovsky.org/gerrit-code-review-2-8-released/. Is there a planned time to upgrade? David___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 2013-12-30 10:25:07 -0500 (-0500), David Kranz wrote: > I get that but it seems like this is a single field per gerrit user. > Is that not true? If true, it is not useful because the point is > that we want to be able to filter reviews that contain changes to > tests for a particular project. I need to make different kinds of > requests, like with a bookmark for each one. Is it possible? Right, the file filter parameter is really only effective for determining what changes Gerrit E-mails you about, or which ones should be incorporated into your list of watched changes. It's not available for general search queries (I suspect this was a compromise made for efficiency reasons since the queries could be pretty intense the way file information is stored in the underlying database). Note, we're still running Gerrit 2.4 at the moment, so once we transition to 2.8 or 2.9 the flexibility in the search interface may increase significantly (I've heard it gives you the ability to bookmark various searches as custom dashboard views, but not sure what other search improvements may be added there). -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 12/29/2013 07:45 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2013-12-29 15:09:24 -0500 (-0500), David Kranz wrote: [...] Looking at the docs I see the warning that you can't put this in the search field so I tried putting it directly in the url like the other parameters but it was ignored. Is there indeed a way to search for only patches that contain changes to files that match a regexp? As the documentation says, "Currently this operator is only available on a watched project..." https://review.openstack.org/Documentation/user-search.html#_search_operators The implication being it's only implemented for filtering project watches--the "Only if" field you see on the Watched Projects setting page. https://review.openstack.org/#/settings/projects I get that but it seems like this is a single field per gerrit user. Is that not true? If true, it is not useful because the point is that we want to be able to filter reviews that contain changes to tests for a particular project. I need to make different kinds of requests, like with a bookmark for each one. Is it possible? -David ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 2013-12-29 15:09:24 -0500 (-0500), David Kranz wrote: [...] > Looking at the docs I see the warning that you can't put this > in the search field so I tried putting it directly in the url like > the other parameters but it was ignored. Is there indeed a way to > search for only patches that contain changes to files that match a > regexp? As the documentation says, "Currently this operator is only available on a watched project..." https://review.openstack.org/Documentation/user-search.html#_search_operators The implication being it's only implemented for filtering project watches--the "Only if" field you see on the Watched Projects setting page. https://review.openstack.org/#/settings/projects -- Jeremy Stanley ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 12/24/2013 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 12/24/2013 01:47 AM, Yair Fried wrote: Hi, Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages the same way you do your mails in the mailing list Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple Openstack project we have a very diverse collection of patches as well as reviewers. Tagging our commit messages will allow us to classify patches and thus: 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of expertise 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in Neutron testing for example, but can we assess how many network related patches are for awaiting review 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by then - you've spent time on a patch you might not even be qualified to review. I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we are looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and that reviewers should -1 untagged patches. I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: == Example commit message [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova Network performance Chang-id XXX === I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -2 I think this is just extra clutter, please don't. Also, it's Holiday season so tons of people are out, policy changes are completely on hold until January. The commit message should be meaningful so I can read it, a bunch of tags I find just ugly and don't want to go near. We already have this information in the directory structure for API tests. And in service tags for the scenario tests. 2 & 3 you can through gerrit API queries. Replicating that information in another place is just error prone. -Sean So I agree with this in theory (now that I know about it) and gave it a whirl after consulting http://dague.net/2013/09/27/gerrit-queries-to-avoid-openstack-review-overload/. I took the basic command and added file:^.*/network/.* but got an error. Looking at the docs I see the warning that you can't put this in the search field so I tried putting it directly in the url like the other parameters but it was ignored. Is there indeed a way to search for only patches that contain changes to files that match a regexp? -David ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 12/24/2013 06:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 12/24/2013 01:47 AM, Yair Fried wrote: Hi, Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages the same way you do your mails in the mailing list Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple Openstack project we have a very diverse collection of patches as well as reviewers. Tagging our commit messages will allow us to classify patches and thus: 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of expertise 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in Neutron testing for example, but can we assess how many network related patches are for awaiting review 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by then - you've spent time on a patch you might not even be qualified to review. I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we are looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and that reviewers should -1 untagged patches. I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: == Example commit message [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova Network performance Chang-id XXX === I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -2 I think this is just extra clutter, please don't. Also, it's Holiday season so tons of people are out, policy changes are completely on hold until January. Yes The commit message should be meaningful so I can read it, a bunch of tags I find just ugly and don't want to go near. We already have this information in the directory structure for API tests. And in service tags for the scenario tests. 2 & 3 you can through gerrit API queries. Replicating that information in another place is just error prone. Perhaps so. Maybe we can figure out some helpful workflows for tempest reviewers and share useful queries. -Sean ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On 12/24/2013 01:47 AM, Yair Fried wrote: > Hi, > Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages the same way > you do your mails in the mailing list > > Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple Openstack > project we have a very diverse collection of patches as well as reviewers. > Tagging our commit messages will allow us to classify patches and thus: > 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of expertise > 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in Neutron > testing for example, but can we assess how many network related patches are > for awaiting review > 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches > > You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by then - > you've spent time on a patch you might not even be qualified to review. > I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we are > looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and that reviewers > should -1 untagged patches. > > I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: > > == > Example commit message > > [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] > > Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova > Network performance > > Chang-id XXX > === > > I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -2 I think this is just extra clutter, please don't. Also, it's Holiday season so tons of people are out, policy changes are completely on hold until January. The commit message should be meaningful so I can read it, a bunch of tags I find just ugly and don't want to go near. We already have this information in the directory structure for API tests. And in service tags for the scenario tests. 2 & 3 you can through gerrit API queries. Replicating that information in another place is just error prone. -Sean -- Sean Dague Samsung Research America s...@dague.net / sean.da...@samsung.com http://dague.net signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Masayuki Igawa wrote: > And, how about do we the tagging about the services in the subject(1st > line)? I think it would be nice to keep the subject simple, the linux kernel have been doing this for a while which just the subsystem in the subject at first, i.e: SCSI: libiscsi regression in 2.6.25: fix nop timer handling See this link for more details : https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/SubmittingPatches Chmouel. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
- Original Message - > From: "Masayuki Igawa" > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 11:39:46 AM > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit > messages > Hi, > On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Yair Fried > wrote: > > > > > > - Original Message - > >> From: "Masayuki Igawa" > >> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > >> > >> Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 10:42:39 AM > >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit > >> messages > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Yair Fried > >> wrote: > >> > Hi, > >> > Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages > >> > the same way you do your mails in the mailing list > >> > > >> > Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple > >> > Openstack project we have a very diverse collection of patches > >> > as > >> > well as reviewers. Tagging our commit messages will allow us to > >> > classify patches and thus: > >> > 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of > >> > expertise > >> > 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack > >> > in > >> > Neutron testing for example, but can we assess how many network > >> > related patches are for awaiting review > >> > 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches > >> > > >> > You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but > >> > by > >> > then - you've spent time on a patch you might not even be > >> > qualified to review. > >> > I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components > >> > we > >> > are looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) > >> > and > >> > that reviewers should -1 untagged patches. > >> > > >> > I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: > >> > > >> > == > >> > Example commit message > >> > > >> > [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] > >> > > >> > Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova > >> > Network performance > >> > > >> > Chang-id XXX > >> > === > >> > > >> > I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys > >> > think? > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> And, how about do we the tagging about the services in the > >> subject(1st line)? > >> For example: > >> Neutron:Example commit subject > >> > >> Because the dashboard of the gerrit shows the subject only now. > >> I think reviewers can find "interesting" patches easily if the > >> dashboard shows the tags. > > > > I just found out you could query search for messages like this: > > status:open message:[Neutron] > Oh, really. Thanks! > But the query of 'status:open message:[Neutron]' only doesn't work > for me. > === > Application Error > Server Error > Invalid query: status:open message:[Neutron] line 1:20 no viable > alternative at character '[' > === > Is there any way working with the brackets? Not that I know of - could be a regex sollution? for now search without brackets, maybe? > Sorry for silly question.. > > > >> This is not so strong opinion because some scenario tests may have > >> several services tags. > > > > And you have a limited subject length that's already not enough > > (for me at least) > I agree. Let's change the subject length limitation to ignore tags > # Maybe, it's too long for the subject if already not enough :) > >> > >> -- > >> Masayuki Igawa > >> > >> ___ > >> OpenStack-dev mailing list > >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >> > > > > ___ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- > Masayuki Igawa > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
Hi, Assuming this is agreed (is it?) - here's the dilemma: - Tagging the subject is problematic due to length limit and fails the pep8 gate - Tagging in the message looses the visibility value Can we check for the subject length without the tags, or disable this check completely? Yair - Original Message - From: "Yair Fried" To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 11:20:40 AM Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages - Original Message - > From: "Masayuki Igawa" > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 10:42:39 AM > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages > > Hi, > > On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Yair Fried > wrote: > > Hi, > > Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages > > the same way you do your mails in the mailing list > > > > Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple > > Openstack project we have a very diverse collection of patches as > > well as reviewers. Tagging our commit messages will allow us to > > classify patches and thus: > > 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of > > expertise > > 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in > > Neutron testing for example, but can we assess how many network > > related patches are for awaiting review > > 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches > > > > You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by > > then - you've spent time on a patch you might not even be > > qualified to review. > > I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we > > are looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and > > that reviewers should -1 untagged patches. > > > > I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: > > > > == > > Example commit message > > > > [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] > > > > Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova > > Network performance > > > > Chang-id XXX > > === > > > > I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? > > +1 > > And, how about do we the tagging about the services in the > subject(1st line)? > For example: > Neutron:Example commit subject > > Because the dashboard of the gerrit shows the subject only now. > I think reviewers can find "interesting" patches easily if the > dashboard shows the tags. I just found out you could query search for messages like this: status:open message:[Neutron] > This is not so strong opinion because some scenario tests may have > several services tags. And you have a limited subject length that's already not enough (for me at least) > > -- > Masayuki Igawa > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
Hi, On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Yair Fried wrote: > > > - Original Message - >> From: "Masayuki Igawa" >> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" >> >> Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 10:42:39 AM >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages >> >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Yair Fried >> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages >> > the same way you do your mails in the mailing list >> > >> > Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple >> > Openstack project we have a very diverse collection of patches as >> > well as reviewers. Tagging our commit messages will allow us to >> > classify patches and thus: >> > 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of >> > expertise >> > 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in >> > Neutron testing for example, but can we assess how many network >> > related patches are for awaiting review >> > 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches >> > >> > You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by >> > then - you've spent time on a patch you might not even be >> > qualified to review. >> > I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we >> > are looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and >> > that reviewers should -1 untagged patches. >> > >> > I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: >> > >> > == >> > Example commit message >> > >> > [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] >> > >> > Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova >> > Network performance >> > >> > Chang-id XXX >> > === >> > >> > I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? >> >> +1 >> >> And, how about do we the tagging about the services in the >> subject(1st line)? >> For example: >> Neutron:Example commit subject >> >> Because the dashboard of the gerrit shows the subject only now. >> I think reviewers can find "interesting" patches easily if the >> dashboard shows the tags. > > I just found out you could query search for messages like this: > status:open message:[Neutron] Oh, really. Thanks! But the query of 'status:open message:[Neutron]' only doesn't work for me. === Application Error Server Error Invalid query: status:open message:[Neutron] line 1:20 no viable alternative at character '[' === Is there any way working with the brackets? Sorry for silly question.. > >> This is not so strong opinion because some scenario tests may have >> several services tags. > > And you have a limited subject length that's already not enough (for me at > least) I agree. # Maybe, it's too long for the subject if already not enough :) >> >> -- >> Masayuki Igawa >> >> ___ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Masayuki Igawa ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
- Original Message - > From: "Masayuki Igawa" > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > > Sent: Tuesday, December 24, 2013 10:42:39 AM > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages > > Hi, > > On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Yair Fried > wrote: > > Hi, > > Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages > > the same way you do your mails in the mailing list > > > > Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple > > Openstack project we have a very diverse collection of patches as > > well as reviewers. Tagging our commit messages will allow us to > > classify patches and thus: > > 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of > > expertise > > 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in > > Neutron testing for example, but can we assess how many network > > related patches are for awaiting review > > 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches > > > > You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by > > then - you've spent time on a patch you might not even be > > qualified to review. > > I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we > > are looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and > > that reviewers should -1 untagged patches. > > > > I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: > > > > == > > Example commit message > > > > [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] > > > > Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova > > Network performance > > > > Chang-id XXX > > === > > > > I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? > > +1 > > And, how about do we the tagging about the services in the > subject(1st line)? > For example: > Neutron:Example commit subject > > Because the dashboard of the gerrit shows the subject only now. > I think reviewers can find "interesting" patches easily if the > dashboard shows the tags. I just found out you could query search for messages like this: status:open message:[Neutron] > This is not so strong opinion because some scenario tests may have > several services tags. And you have a limited subject length that's already not enough (for me at least) > > -- > Masayuki Igawa > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
Hi, On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Yair Fried wrote: > Hi, > Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages the same way > you do your mails in the mailing list > > Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple Openstack > project we have a very diverse collection of patches as well as reviewers. > Tagging our commit messages will allow us to classify patches and thus: > 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of expertise > 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in Neutron > testing for example, but can we assess how many network related patches are > for awaiting review > 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches > > You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by then - > you've spent time on a patch you might not even be qualified to review. > I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we are > looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and that reviewers > should -1 untagged patches. > > I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: > > == > Example commit message > > [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] > > Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova > Network performance > > Chang-id XXX > === > > I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? +1 And, how about do we the tagging about the services in the subject(1st line)? For example: Neutron:Example commit subject Because the dashboard of the gerrit shows the subject only now. I think reviewers can find "interesting" patches easily if the dashboard shows the tags. This is not so strong opinion because some scenario tests may have several services tags. -- Masayuki Igawa ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
+1 2013/12/24 Yair Fried > Hi, > Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages the same > way you do your mails in the mailing list > > Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple Openstack > project we have a very diverse collection of patches as well as reviewers. > Tagging our commit messages will allow us to classify patches and thus: > 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of expertise > 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in Neutron > testing for example, but can we assess how many network related patches are > for awaiting review > 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches > > You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by then - > you've spent time on a patch you might not even be qualified to review. > I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we are > looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and that > reviewers should -1 untagged patches. > > I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: > > == > Example commit message > > [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] > > Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova > Network performance > > Chang-id XXX > === > > I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? > > ___ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- *---* *Lingxian Kong* Huawei Technologies Co.,LTD. IT Product Line CloudOS PDU China, Xi'an Mobile: +86-18602962792 Email: konglingx...@huawei.com; anlin.k...@gmail.com ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Tempest][qa] Adding tags to commit messages
Hi, Suggestion: Please consider tagging your Tempest commit messages the same way you do your mails in the mailing list Explanation: Since tempest is a single project testing multiple Openstack project we have a very diverse collection of patches as well as reviewers. Tagging our commit messages will allow us to classify patches and thus: 1. Allow reviewer to focus on patches related to their area of expertise 2. Track "trends" in patches - I think we all know that we lack in Neutron testing for example, but can we assess how many network related patches are for awaiting review 3. Future automation of flagging "interesting" patches You can usually tell all of this from reviewing the patch, but by then - you've spent time on a patch you might not even be qualified to review. I suggest we tag our patches with, to start with, the components we are looking to test, and the type of test (sceanrio, api, ...) and that reviewers should -1 untagged patches. I think the tagging should be the 2nd line in the message: == Example commit message [Neutron][Nova][Network][Scenario] Explanation of how this scenario tests both Neutron and Nova Network performance Chang-id XXX === I would like this to start immediately but what do you guys think? ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
