Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
Hi Anita, Thanks for the clarification. I will plan on attending the summit session on this topic (proposed by Kurt, I believe). I have to admit that I have to always keep an eye out to ensure nothing is broken in our CI because of any upgrade of packages, etc. and act accordingly. If new unified framework can reduce/eliminate this effort, I would like to at least understand it and discuss with the participants - and, may join in. Thanks for the good work. -Sukhdev On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Anita Kuno ante...@anteaya.info wrote: On 04/20/2015 04:39 PM, Sukhdev Kapur wrote: Hi Ramy, While I agree, in principal, with this line of thinking and goal, my concern will be how much extra work is it going to create for existing CI owners? Our Ci system has been stable for a long time, and we put in a good amount of effort to get it to that point. Our CI is not based upon zuul framework. Zuul was still under discussion at the time when we put together our CI. We use Jenkins as front end, along with Gerrit triggers, and AWS for posting/preserving results/log. We have dedicated back-end servers for testing. My paranoia at this point will be to learn a new framework, risk breaking things and taking a huge effort to get things stabilized - without much additional ROI. Am I overreacting here or does my argument makes sense? I wonder how many folks will be in that camp? Sukhdev Hi Sukhdev: What is being offered is an opportunity to pool efforts for those who wish to participate. There is no pressure to participate if you are concerned that you would compromise the integrity of a stable system. You and others that have put in so much work are to be lauded for your commitment to your goal, thank you. Ramy's efforts in no way are an attempt to degrade the stability you have created. Part of the exhaustion level folks feel in this space, at all points in the spectrum, is the cost of maintenance. In infra we are constantly dealing with problems from operators and it would reduce the burden on us, as well as reduce the tension on operators, if we had a solution that was easier to maintain. The more people running the same structure, the easier any one issue is to solve (hopefully). The goal is once the structure is in place that OpenStack's Infra would also consume it, enabling common bugs to be discovered and fixed upstream. Noone is forced to participate nor are they going to be forced to operate this structure. This is simply a chance to work together on a direction which infra would very much like to see in place. Thanks Sukhdev, Anita. On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Asselin, Ramy ramy.asse...@hp.com wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
Hi Ramy, Take me in account. I'm interested in a common solution and I'm trying to get more involved in the community, so I think that could be a nice initiative to contribute to the community. If I can help, would be awesome. I'll start to attend to third party ci meetings. Regards On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Sukhdev Kapur sukhdevka...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Anita, Thanks for the clarification. I will plan on attending the summit session on this topic (proposed by Kurt, I believe). I have to admit that I have to always keep an eye out to ensure nothing is broken in our CI because of any upgrade of packages, etc. and act accordingly. If new unified framework can reduce/eliminate this effort, I would like to at least understand it and discuss with the participants - and, may join in. Thanks for the good work. -Sukhdev On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Anita Kuno ante...@anteaya.info wrote: On 04/20/2015 04:39 PM, Sukhdev Kapur wrote: Hi Ramy, While I agree, in principal, with this line of thinking and goal, my concern will be how much extra work is it going to create for existing CI owners? Our Ci system has been stable for a long time, and we put in a good amount of effort to get it to that point. Our CI is not based upon zuul framework. Zuul was still under discussion at the time when we put together our CI. We use Jenkins as front end, along with Gerrit triggers, and AWS for posting/preserving results/log. We have dedicated back-end servers for testing. My paranoia at this point will be to learn a new framework, risk breaking things and taking a huge effort to get things stabilized - without much additional ROI. Am I overreacting here or does my argument makes sense? I wonder how many folks will be in that camp? Sukhdev Hi Sukhdev: What is being offered is an opportunity to pool efforts for those who wish to participate. There is no pressure to participate if you are concerned that you would compromise the integrity of a stable system. You and others that have put in so much work are to be lauded for your commitment to your goal, thank you. Ramy's efforts in no way are an attempt to degrade the stability you have created. Part of the exhaustion level folks feel in this space, at all points in the spectrum, is the cost of maintenance. In infra we are constantly dealing with problems from operators and it would reduce the burden on us, as well as reduce the tension on operators, if we had a solution that was easier to maintain. The more people running the same structure, the easier any one issue is to solve (hopefully). The goal is once the structure is in place that OpenStack's Infra would also consume it, enabling common bugs to be discovered and fixed upstream. Noone is forced to participate nor are they going to be forced to operate this structure. This is simply a chance to work together on a direction which infra would very much like to see in place. Thanks Sukhdev, Anita. On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Asselin, Ramy ramy.asse...@hp.com wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
Hi Ramy, Will there be any discussions of this issue on the Vancouver Summit? Lenny Verkhovsky SW Engineer, Mellanox Technologies From: Nikolay Fedotov (nfedotov) [mailto:nfedo...@cisco.com] Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 8:10 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution! Hello Ramy Take me in account ☺ We used puppet modules located in system-config to install zuul and nodepool. Also there were a lot manual configuration. Maybe someday there will be a “green button” to set it up in moment. Thanks! From: Asselin, Ramy [mailto:ramy.asse...@hp.com] Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 8:17 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution! All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
On 04/20/2015 04:39 PM, Sukhdev Kapur wrote: Hi Ramy, While I agree, in principal, with this line of thinking and goal, my concern will be how much extra work is it going to create for existing CI owners? Our Ci system has been stable for a long time, and we put in a good amount of effort to get it to that point. Our CI is not based upon zuul framework. Zuul was still under discussion at the time when we put together our CI. We use Jenkins as front end, along with Gerrit triggers, and AWS for posting/preserving results/log. We have dedicated back-end servers for testing. My paranoia at this point will be to learn a new framework, risk breaking things and taking a huge effort to get things stabilized - without much additional ROI. Am I overreacting here or does my argument makes sense? I wonder how many folks will be in that camp? Sukhdev Hi Sukhdev: What is being offered is an opportunity to pool efforts for those who wish to participate. There is no pressure to participate if you are concerned that you would compromise the integrity of a stable system. You and others that have put in so much work are to be lauded for your commitment to your goal, thank you. Ramy's efforts in no way are an attempt to degrade the stability you have created. Part of the exhaustion level folks feel in this space, at all points in the spectrum, is the cost of maintenance. In infra we are constantly dealing with problems from operators and it would reduce the burden on us, as well as reduce the tension on operators, if we had a solution that was easier to maintain. The more people running the same structure, the easier any one issue is to solve (hopefully). The goal is once the structure is in place that OpenStack's Infra would also consume it, enabling common bugs to be discovered and fixed upstream. Noone is forced to participate nor are they going to be forced to operate this structure. This is simply a chance to work together on a direction which infra would very much like to see in place. Thanks Sukhdev, Anita. On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Asselin, Ramy ramy.asse...@hp.com wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
HI Sukhdev, I also wonder how many folks are in that camp. Regardless, if we can go from 85 -- 2 (or any other much smaller number), then that is a good thing. Also, from an open source point of view, I’d like to see new contributors/vendors contributing effort on value-add innovation, and less on recreating/maintaining the ‘common’ portions of 3rd party ci. Ramy From: Sukhdev Kapur [mailto:sukhdevka...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 1:39 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution! Hi Ramy, While I agree, in principal, with this line of thinking and goal, my concern will be how much extra work is it going to create for existing CI owners? Our Ci system has been stable for a long time, and we put in a good amount of effort to get it to that point. Our CI is not based upon zuul framework. Zuul was still under discussion at the time when we put together our CI. We use Jenkins as front end, along with Gerrit triggers, and AWS for posting/preserving results/log. We have dedicated back-end servers for testing. My paranoia at this point will be to learn a new framework, risk breaking things and taking a huge effort to get things stabilized - without much additional ROI. Am I overreacting here or does my argument makes sense? I wonder how many folks will be in that camp? Sukhdev On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Asselin, Ramy ramy.asse...@hp.commailto:ramy.asse...@hp.com wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribehttp://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
Hello Ramy Take me in account ☺ We used puppet modules located in system-config to install zuul and nodepool. Also there were a lot manual configuration. Maybe someday there will be a “green button” to set it up in moment. Thanks! From: Asselin, Ramy [mailto:ramy.asse...@hp.com] Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 8:17 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution! All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
Hi Ramy, While I agree, in principal, with this line of thinking and goal, my concern will be how much extra work is it going to create for existing CI owners? Our Ci system has been stable for a long time, and we put in a good amount of effort to get it to that point. Our CI is not based upon zuul framework. Zuul was still under discussion at the time when we put together our CI. We use Jenkins as front end, along with Gerrit triggers, and AWS for posting/preserving results/log. We have dedicated back-end servers for testing. My paranoia at this point will be to learn a new framework, risk breaking things and taking a huge effort to get things stabilized - without much additional ROI. Am I overreacting here or does my argument makes sense? I wonder how many folks will be in that camp? Sukhdev On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 10:17 PM, Asselin, Ramy ramy.asse...@hp.com wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
You rock, Ramy. Seriously, awesome work. -jay On 04/20/2015 01:17 AM, Asselin, Ramy wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
On 04/20/2015 03:19 AM, Jaume Devesa wrote: Hi Ramy, Soon I'll be the responsible of the Midokura's third-party CI, which has been mute for a while because a flaky physical resources that our sys admins couldn't take care because they are overloaded of work... Count on me! I do hope luqas will still be available some times, he has been so proactive. It has been wonderful to work with him. I'm looking forward to getting to know you as well, Jaume. Thanks Asselin, for kicking off this thread, you have been doing wonderful work here. It is great to see you have reached this place. I am really looking forward to your work continuing, making installing and maintaining a ci easier for both operators and for infra. Thank you, Anita. On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 05:17, Asselin, Ramy wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
Hi Ramy, Soon I'll be the responsible of the Midokura's third-party CI, which has been mute for a while because a flaky physical resources that our sys admins couldn't take care because they are overloaded of work... Count on me! On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 05:17, Asselin, Ramy wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Jaume Devesa Software Engineer at Midokura __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
Thanks Ramy! I'd suggest that we use the cross-project session I proposed [1] for Liberty summit as a working session primarily focused on this work [2]. [1] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1vCTZBJKCMZ2xBhglnuK3ciKo3E8UMFo5S5lmIAYMCSE/edit?usp=sharing [2] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/liberty-third-party-ci-working-group On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: You rock, Ramy. Seriously, awesome work. -jay On 04/20/2015 01:17 AM, Asselin, Ramy wrote: All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [third-party][infra] Third-Party CI Operators: Let's use a common CI Solution!
All Third-Party CI operators: We’ve got 85 Third Party CI systems registered in the wiki[1], all of them running a variety of closed open-source solutions. Instead of individually maintaining all those similar solutions, let’s join together and collectively maintain a single solution. If that sounds good to you, there’s an Infra-spec that’s been approved [2] to refactor much of what the Infrastructure team uses for the upstream “Jenkins” CI to be more easily reusable by many of us. We’ve got stories defined [3], and a few patches submitted. We’re using the gerrit-topic “downstream-puppet” [4]. For example, we’ve got the first part under review for the “Log Server”, which creates your own version of http://logs.openstack.org/ If anyone is interested in migrating towards a common solution, reply, or ping me IRC (asselin) on Freenode #openstack-infra, or join some of the third party ci meetings [5]. Thanks! Ramy [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems [2] http://specs.openstack.org/openstack-infra/infra-specs/specs/openstackci.html [3] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2000101 [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:downstream-puppet,n,z [5] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ThirdParty#Weekly_Third_Party_meetings __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
