Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
Sean, Thanks for making this change! Jay On Jul 25, 2014 5:41 AM, "Sean Dague" wrote: > On 07/25/2014 01:18 AM, Ian Wienand wrote: > > On 07/16/2014 11:15 PM, Alexis Lee wrote: > >> What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no > >> bug"? > > > > I think this is a good idea; I am often away from a change for a bit, > > something happens in-between and Jenkins fails it, but chasing it down > > days later is fairly pointless given how fast things move. > > > > It would be nice if I could indicate "I thought about this". In fact, > > there might be an argument for *requiring* a reason > > > > I proposed [1] to allow this > > > > -i > > > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109492/ > > At the QA / Infra meetup we actually talked about the recheck syntax, > and to change the way elastic recheck is interacting with the user. > > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/elastic-recheck+branch:master+topic:erchanges,n,z > > and > > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/config+branch:master+topic:er,n,z > > Are the result of that. Basically going forward we'll just support > > 'recheck.*' > > If you want to provide us with info after the recheck, great, we can > mine it later. However we aren't using that a ton at this point, so > we'll make it easier on people. > > -Sean > > -- > Sean Dague > http://dague.net > > ___ > 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] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On 07/25/2014 08:27 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 07/25/2014 07:48 AM, Bob Ball wrote: -Original Message- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: 25 July 2014 12:36 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment Would that still allow us to only trigger 3rd party CI ? eg if we do 'recheck xenserver' I don't want to trigger the main CI, only the Xen CI. No, the 3rd party folks went off and created a grammar without discussing it with the infra team (also against specific objections to doing so). Such it is. When setting up the XenServer CI the recheck syntax I added was requested by reviewers and I certainly wasn't aware of these specific objections. Do you have a proposal for the grammar you'd like 3rd party CIs to follow? Consider: ^(recheck|check|reverify) off limits namespace. If you want a namespace for commands specific to a 3rd party CI, that should start with the 3rd party CI name. ^3rd party CI name: command It should be the official short name in the system so there is no future collisions issue. Well, I apologize if I furthered the idea that 3rd party CI systems should implement a "recheck $VENDOR" trigger. Sorry, I never knew they were supposed to be off limits :( -jay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On 07/25/2014 07:48 AM, Bob Ball wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] >> Sent: 25 July 2014 12:36 >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment >> >>> Would that still allow us to only trigger 3rd party CI ? eg if we do >>> 'recheck xenserver' I don't want to trigger the main CI, only the Xen >>> CI. >> >> No, the 3rd party folks went off and created a grammar without >> discussing it with the infra team (also against specific objections to >> doing so). Such it is. > > When setting up the XenServer CI the recheck syntax I added was requested by > reviewers and I certainly wasn't aware of these specific objections. > > Do you have a proposal for the grammar you'd like 3rd party CIs to follow? Consider: ^(recheck|check|reverify) off limits namespace. If you want a namespace for commands specific to a 3rd party CI, that should start with the 3rd party CI name. ^3rd party CI name: command It should be the official short name in the system so there is no future collisions issue. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 07:35:52AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 07/25/2014 07:17 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 07:09:56AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 07/25/2014 06:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > >>> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:38:29AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 07/25/2014 01:18 AM, Ian Wienand wrote: > > On 07/16/2014 11:15 PM, Alexis Lee wrote: > >> What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no > >> bug"? > > > > I think this is a good idea; I am often away from a change for a bit, > > something happens in-between and Jenkins fails it, but chasing it down > > days later is fairly pointless given how fast things move. > > > > It would be nice if I could indicate "I thought about this". In fact, > > there might be an argument for *requiring* a reason > > > > I proposed [1] to allow this > > > > -i > > > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109492/ > > At the QA / Infra meetup we actually talked about the recheck syntax, > and to change the way elastic recheck is interacting with the user. > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/elastic-recheck+branch:master+topic:erchanges,n,z > > and > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/config+branch:master+topic:er,n,z > > Are the result of that. Basically going forward we'll just support > > 'recheck.*' > >>> > >>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that ? Are we going to > >>> use the literal string 'recheck.*' or do you mean we'll use 'recheck' > >>> and the user can put arbitrary text after it ? > >> > >> Sorry, I think in regex. recheck + arbitrary string. > > > > Would that still allow us to only trigger 3rd party CI ? eg if we do > > 'recheck xenserver' I don't want to trigger the main CI, only the Xen > > CI. > > No, the 3rd party folks went off and created a grammar without > discussing it with the infra team (also against specific objections to > doing so). Such it is. Whether or not we agree with the current syntax, it is *critical* to maintain this ability to trigger only 3rd party CI systems, otherwise the odds of being able to get a pass from all CI go down the toilet even further than they already are. We must resolve this before introducing the new syntax Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
> -Original Message- > From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] > Sent: 25 July 2014 12:36 > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment > > > Would that still allow us to only trigger 3rd party CI ? eg if we do > > 'recheck xenserver' I don't want to trigger the main CI, only the Xen > > CI. > > No, the 3rd party folks went off and created a grammar without > discussing it with the infra team (also against specific objections to > doing so). Such it is. When setting up the XenServer CI the recheck syntax I added was requested by reviewers and I certainly wasn't aware of these specific objections. Do you have a proposal for the grammar you'd like 3rd party CIs to follow? Thanks, Bob ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On 07/25/2014 07:17 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 07:09:56AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 07/25/2014 06:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:38:29AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: On 07/25/2014 01:18 AM, Ian Wienand wrote: > On 07/16/2014 11:15 PM, Alexis Lee wrote: >> What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no >> bug"? > > I think this is a good idea; I am often away from a change for a bit, > something happens in-between and Jenkins fails it, but chasing it down > days later is fairly pointless given how fast things move. > > It would be nice if I could indicate "I thought about this". In fact, > there might be an argument for *requiring* a reason > > I proposed [1] to allow this > > -i > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109492/ At the QA / Infra meetup we actually talked about the recheck syntax, and to change the way elastic recheck is interacting with the user. https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/elastic-recheck+branch:master+topic:erchanges,n,z and https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/config+branch:master+topic:er,n,z Are the result of that. Basically going forward we'll just support 'recheck.*' >>> >>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that ? Are we going to >>> use the literal string 'recheck.*' or do you mean we'll use 'recheck' >>> and the user can put arbitrary text after it ? >> >> Sorry, I think in regex. recheck + arbitrary string. > > Would that still allow us to only trigger 3rd party CI ? eg if we do > 'recheck xenserver' I don't want to trigger the main CI, only the Xen > CI. No, the 3rd party folks went off and created a grammar without discussing it with the infra team (also against specific objections to doing so). Such it is. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 07:09:56AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 07/25/2014 06:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:38:29AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 07/25/2014 01:18 AM, Ian Wienand wrote: > >>> On 07/16/2014 11:15 PM, Alexis Lee wrote: > What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no > bug"? > >>> > >>> I think this is a good idea; I am often away from a change for a bit, > >>> something happens in-between and Jenkins fails it, but chasing it down > >>> days later is fairly pointless given how fast things move. > >>> > >>> It would be nice if I could indicate "I thought about this". In fact, > >>> there might be an argument for *requiring* a reason > >>> > >>> I proposed [1] to allow this > >>> > >>> -i > >>> > >>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109492/ > >> > >> At the QA / Infra meetup we actually talked about the recheck syntax, > >> and to change the way elastic recheck is interacting with the user. > >> > >> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/elastic-recheck+branch:master+topic:erchanges,n,z > >> > >> and > >> > >> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/config+branch:master+topic:er,n,z > >> > >> Are the result of that. Basically going forward we'll just support > >> > >> 'recheck.*' > > > > I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that ? Are we going to > > use the literal string 'recheck.*' or do you mean we'll use 'recheck' > > and the user can put arbitrary text after it ? > > Sorry, I think in regex. recheck + arbitrary string. Would that still allow us to only trigger 3rd party CI ? eg if we do 'recheck xenserver' I don't want to trigger the main CI, only the Xen CI. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On 07/25/2014 06:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:38:29AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 07/25/2014 01:18 AM, Ian Wienand wrote: >>> On 07/16/2014 11:15 PM, Alexis Lee wrote: What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no bug"? >>> >>> I think this is a good idea; I am often away from a change for a bit, >>> something happens in-between and Jenkins fails it, but chasing it down >>> days later is fairly pointless given how fast things move. >>> >>> It would be nice if I could indicate "I thought about this". In fact, >>> there might be an argument for *requiring* a reason >>> >>> I proposed [1] to allow this >>> >>> -i >>> >>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109492/ >> >> At the QA / Infra meetup we actually talked about the recheck syntax, >> and to change the way elastic recheck is interacting with the user. >> >> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/elastic-recheck+branch:master+topic:erchanges,n,z >> >> and >> >> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/config+branch:master+topic:er,n,z >> >> Are the result of that. Basically going forward we'll just support >> >> 'recheck.*' > > I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that ? Are we going to > use the literal string 'recheck.*' or do you mean we'll use 'recheck' > and the user can put arbitrary text after it ? Sorry, I think in regex. recheck + arbitrary string. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 06:38:29AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 07/25/2014 01:18 AM, Ian Wienand wrote: > > On 07/16/2014 11:15 PM, Alexis Lee wrote: > >> What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no > >> bug"? > > > > I think this is a good idea; I am often away from a change for a bit, > > something happens in-between and Jenkins fails it, but chasing it down > > days later is fairly pointless given how fast things move. > > > > It would be nice if I could indicate "I thought about this". In fact, > > there might be an argument for *requiring* a reason > > > > I proposed [1] to allow this > > > > -i > > > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109492/ > > At the QA / Infra meetup we actually talked about the recheck syntax, > and to change the way elastic recheck is interacting with the user. > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/elastic-recheck+branch:master+topic:erchanges,n,z > > and > > https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/config+branch:master+topic:er,n,z > > Are the result of that. Basically going forward we'll just support > > 'recheck.*' I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that ? Are we going to use the literal string 'recheck.*' or do you mean we'll use 'recheck' and the user can put arbitrary text after it ? Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On 07/25/2014 01:18 AM, Ian Wienand wrote: > On 07/16/2014 11:15 PM, Alexis Lee wrote: >> What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no >> bug"? > > I think this is a good idea; I am often away from a change for a bit, > something happens in-between and Jenkins fails it, but chasing it down > days later is fairly pointless given how fast things move. > > It would be nice if I could indicate "I thought about this". In fact, > there might be an argument for *requiring* a reason > > I proposed [1] to allow this > > -i > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109492/ At the QA / Infra meetup we actually talked about the recheck syntax, and to change the way elastic recheck is interacting with the user. https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/elastic-recheck+branch:master+topic:erchanges,n,z and https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack-infra/config+branch:master+topic:er,n,z Are the result of that. Basically going forward we'll just support 'recheck.*' If you want to provide us with info after the recheck, great, we can mine it later. However we aren't using that a ton at this point, so we'll make it easier on people. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On 07/16/2014 11:15 PM, Alexis Lee wrote: What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no bug"? I think this is a good idea; I am often away from a change for a bit, something happens in-between and Jenkins fails it, but chasing it down days later is fairly pointless given how fast things move. It would be nice if I could indicate "I thought about this". In fact, there might be an argument for *requiring* a reason I proposed [1] to allow this -i [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109492/ ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
I agree that there are cases where a bug is overkill and it would be nice to add a note showing I did put some thought into doing the recheck no bug. Just my two cents. On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 17:07 +0100, Derek Higgins wrote: > On 16/07/14 14:48, Steve Martinelli wrote: > > What are the benefits of doing this over looking at the existing > > rechecks, and if not there opening a bug and rechecking the new bug? > > I agree we should be using a bug number (or open one when needed), the > example in the original email should have included a bug number but now > that the topic has come up > > I think this would serve as a good way to provide a little explanation > as to why somebody has not provided a bug number e.g. > > recheck no bug >zuul was restarted > > Derek > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > *Steve Martinelli* > > Software Developer - Openstack > > Keystone Core Member > > > > *Phone:*1-905-413-2851* > > E-mail:*_steve...@ca.ibm.com_ <mailto:steve...@ca.ibm.com> > > 8200 Warden Ave > > Markham, ON L6G 1C7 > > Canada > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Alexis Lee > > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage > > questions)" , > > Date:07/16/2014 09:19 AM > > Subject:[openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment > > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no > > bug"? EG to include a snippet from the log showing the failure has been > > at least briefly investigated before attempting a recheck. EG: > > > > recheck no bug > > > > Compute node failed to spawn: > > > >2014-07-15 12:18:09.936 | 3f1e7f32-812e-48c8-a83c-2615c4451fa6 | > > overcloud-NovaCompute0-zahdxwar7zlh | ERROR | - | NOSTATE | | > > > > > > Alexis > > -- > > Nova Engineer, HP Cloud. AKA lealexis, lxsli. > > > > ___ > > 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 ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
On 16/07/14 14:48, Steve Martinelli wrote: > What are the benefits of doing this over looking at the existing > rechecks, and if not there opening a bug and rechecking the new bug? I agree we should be using a bug number (or open one when needed), the example in the original email should have included a bug number but now that the topic has come up I think this would serve as a good way to provide a little explanation as to why somebody has not provided a bug number e.g. recheck no bug zuul was restarted Derek > > > Regards, > > *Steve Martinelli* > Software Developer - Openstack > Keystone Core Member > > *Phone:*1-905-413-2851* > E-mail:*_steve...@ca.ibm.com_ <mailto:steve...@ca.ibm.com> > 8200 Warden Ave > Markham, ON L6G 1C7 > Canada > > > > > > > From:Alexis Lee > To:"OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage > questions)" , > Date: 07/16/2014 09:19 AM > Subject:[openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment > > > > > Hello, > > What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no > bug"? EG to include a snippet from the log showing the failure has been > at least briefly investigated before attempting a recheck. EG: > > recheck no bug > > Compute node failed to spawn: > >2014-07-15 12:18:09.936 | 3f1e7f32-812e-48c8-a83c-2615c4451fa6 | > overcloud-NovaCompute0-zahdxwar7zlh | ERROR | - | NOSTATE | | > > > Alexis > -- > Nova Engineer, HP Cloud. AKA lealexis, lxsli. > > ___ > 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] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
What are the benefits of doing this over looking at the existing rechecks, and if not there opening a bug and rechecking the new bug? Regards, Steve Martinelli Software Developer - Openstack Keystone Core Member Phone: 1-905-413-2851 E-mail: steve...@ca.ibm.com 8200 Warden Ave Markham, ON L6G 1C7 Canada From: Alexis Lee To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" , Date: 07/16/2014 09:19 AM Subject: [openstack-dev] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment Hello, What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no bug"? EG to include a snippet from the log showing the failure has been at least briefly investigated before attempting a recheck. EG: recheck no bug Compute node failed to spawn: 2014-07-15 12:18:09.936 | 3f1e7f32-812e-48c8-a83c-2615c4451fa6 | overcloud-NovaCompute0-zahdxwar7zlh | ERROR | - | NOSTATE | | Alexis -- Nova Engineer, HP Cloud. AKA lealexis, lxsli. ___ 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] [infra] "recheck no bug" and comment
Hello, What do you think about allowing some text after the words "recheck no bug"? EG to include a snippet from the log showing the failure has been at least briefly investigated before attempting a recheck. EG: recheck no bug Compute node failed to spawn: 2014-07-15 12:18:09.936 | 3f1e7f32-812e-48c8-a83c-2615c4451fa6 | overcloud-NovaCompute0-zahdxwar7zlh | ERROR | - | NOSTATE | | Alexis -- Nova Engineer, HP Cloud. AKA lealexis, lxsli. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
