Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer][Tempest]Tracking of blueprints and changes
On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 2:53 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote: On 12/27/2013 05:27 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote: Hello guys! I hope all of you are enjoying the holidays! But I'd like to raise a Tempest question. Again. I hope this email will not be lost after vacations :) After the summit we decided to track all tests that are being created for Ceilometer in Tempest here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/add-basic-ceilometer-tests. Besides, we've created an etherpad page with a test plan https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-test-plan. But it turned out that it works very bad. Now we have at least 3 change requests that have common functionality implemented. So we definitely need more reliable mechanism for tracking any changes. That's why I suggest to create a separate blueprint for each functionality. E.g. Ceilometer client for Tempest, Notification testing with several bps that depend on it (Swift notifications, Glance notifications, Nova notifications) and so on. In future we may vary the detail level of blueprints but now we need very detailed ones because different people have started to work on e.g. notifications. So there are the following action items: 1. Resolve all conflicts in changes that are on review now (see my comment to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/39237/ patch set 21 for more details) 2. Create set of blueprints from the testplan we have 3. Add Tempest discussions to Ceilometer weekly meeting agenda (done) I may take care of all the items above. I need only ok from PTLs and Cores. Anyway, we've started working on 1st item, because it is urgent. The second one may be postponed due to holidays. And one more important thing. Code review for Ceilometer tests in Tempest is too slow. Some of change requests are created almost a half a year ago! Ceilometer guys, please be informed. I think all of us are interested in good tests. Thank you for attention, Nadya So the tempest patches for ceilometer are still not a coherent set. Can you please mark anything that is not ready for review as Work In Progress, or abandon until there is really something to review? Also, having looked at a few of these, I am confused about the usage of ceilometer, metering, telemetry. Is there an explanation for the context in which each of these terms is to be used? Ceilometer is the code name for the project, like neutron and nova. OpenStack Telemetry is the official name for ceilometer, like OpenStack Networking and OpenStack Compute. Doug -David ___ 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] [Ceilometer][Tempest]Tracking of blueprints and changes
On 12/27/2013 05:27 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote: Hello guys! I hope all of you are enjoying the holidays! But I'd like to raise a Tempest question. Again. I hope this email will not be lost after vacations :) After the summit we decided to track all tests that are being created for Ceilometer in Tempest here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/add-basic-ceilometer-tests. Besides, we've created an etherpad page with a test plan https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-test-plan. But it turned out that it works very bad. Now we have at least 3 change requests that have common functionality implemented. So we definitely need more reliable mechanism for tracking any changes. That's why I suggest to create a separate blueprint for each functionality. E.g. Ceilometer client for Tempest, Notification testing with several bps that depend on it (Swift notifications, Glance notifications, Nova notifications) and so on. In future we may vary the detail level of blueprints but now we need very detailed ones because different people have started to work on e.g. notifications. So there are the following action items: 1. Resolve all conflicts in changes that are on review now (see my comment to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/39237/ patch set 21 for more details) 2. Create set of blueprints from the testplan we have 3. Add Tempest discussions to Ceilometer weekly meeting agenda (done) I may take care of all the items above. I need only ok from PTLs and Cores. Anyway, we've started working on 1st item, because it is urgent. The second one may be postponed due to holidays. And one more important thing. Code review for Ceilometer tests in Tempest is too slow. Some of change requests are created almost a half a year ago! Ceilometer guys, please be informed. I think all of us are interested in good tests. Thank you for attention, Nadya So the tempest patches for ceilometer are still not a coherent set. Can you please mark anything that is not ready for review as Work In Progress, or abandon until there is really something to review? Also, having looked at a few of these, I am confused about the usage of ceilometer, metering, telemetry. Is there an explanation for the context in which each of these terms is to be used? -David ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer][Tempest]Tracking of blueprints and changes
Hello all, Thank you for your suggestions about tracking bps. I'll create a spreadsheet. David, 1. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/55276/ is ready for review 2. We decided to move base.py to a separate change request: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64304/ to make it merged ASAP. But now I see that reviewers want to see an example of usage. We didn't wanted to add any examples there. There are several changes that are abandoned now but will be restored soon with dependency on 64304 ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/43481/, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/46745/). What do you think is it OK to keep 64304 as a separate one? 3. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/39237/ is In Progress because it should be depended on 2. 4. Not sure why https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64299/ is a separate one. It is a part of 1 now. I think it should be abandoned. And about ceilometer, metering, telemetry. Originally 'metering' was used, but official was changed to 'telemetry'. I'm not the person who resolved such questions but I guess that 'telemetry' is the final solution. Anyway, I will discuss it with Julien. Thanks, Nadya On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 11:53 PM, David Kranz dkr...@redhat.com wrote: On 12/27/2013 05:27 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote: Hello guys! I hope all of you are enjoying the holidays! But I'd like to raise a Tempest question. Again. I hope this email will not be lost after vacations :) After the summit we decided to track all tests that are being created for Ceilometer in Tempest here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/add-basic-ceilometer-tests. Besides, we've created an etherpad page with a test plan https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-test-plan. But it turned out that it works very bad. Now we have at least 3 change requests that have common functionality implemented. So we definitely need more reliable mechanism for tracking any changes. That's why I suggest to create a separate blueprint for each functionality. E.g. Ceilometer client for Tempest, Notification testing with several bps that depend on it (Swift notifications, Glance notifications, Nova notifications) and so on. In future we may vary the detail level of blueprints but now we need very detailed ones because different people have started to work on e.g. notifications. So there are the following action items: 1. Resolve all conflicts in changes that are on review now (see my comment to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/39237/ patch set 21 for more details) 2. Create set of blueprints from the testplan we have 3. Add Tempest discussions to Ceilometer weekly meeting agenda (done) I may take care of all the items above. I need only ok from PTLs and Cores. Anyway, we've started working on 1st item, because it is urgent. The second one may be postponed due to holidays. And one more important thing. Code review for Ceilometer tests in Tempest is too slow. Some of change requests are created almost a half a year ago! Ceilometer guys, please be informed. I think all of us are interested in good tests. Thank you for attention, Nadya So the tempest patches for ceilometer are still not a coherent set. Can you please mark anything that is not ready for review as Work In Progress, or abandon until there is really something to review? Also, having looked at a few of these, I am confused about the usage of ceilometer, metering, telemetry. Is there an explanation for the context in which each of these terms is to be used? -David ___ 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] [Ceilometer][Tempest]Tracking of blueprints and changes
On 12/27/2013 05:27 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote: Hello guys! I hope all of you are enjoying the holidays! But I'd like to raise a Tempest question. Again. I hope this email will not be lost after vacations :) After the summit we decided to track all tests that are being created for Ceilometer in Tempest here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/add-basic-ceilometer-tests. Besides, we've created an etherpad page with a test plan https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-test-plan. But it turned out that it works very bad. Now we have at least 3 change requests that have common functionality implemented. So we definitely need more reliable mechanism for tracking any changes. That's why I suggest to create a separate blueprint for each functionality. E.g. Ceilometer client for Tempest, Notification testing with several bps that depend on it (Swift notifications, Glance notifications, Nova notifications) and so on. In future we may vary the detail level of blueprints but now we need very detailed ones because different people have started to work on e.g. notifications. So there are the following action items: 1. Resolve all conflicts in changes that are on review now (see my comment to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/39237/ patch set 21 for more details) 2. Create set of blueprints from the testplan we have 3. Add Tempest discussions to Ceilometer weekly meeting agenda (done) I may take care of all the items above. I need only ok from PTLs and Cores. Anyway, we've started working on 1st item, because it is urgent. The second one may be postponed due to holidays. And one more important thing. Code review for Ceilometer tests in Tempest is too slow. Some of change requests are created almost a half a year ago! Ceilometer guys, please be informed. I think all of us are interested in good tests. Thank you for attention, Nadya Thanks, Nadya. A similar issue came up with heat. The problem is that tempest really has two parts: the tempest infrastructure itself, and all the test files for the various projects. The tempest team needs to manage its blueprints and we can't do that if there are dozens of blueprints about test implementation across projects. This problem is exacerbated by the fact that launchpad is not a good tool for project management which is the issue you are dealing with. For now, the best thing would be to have a master blueprint in tempest. If you want it to point to sub-blueprints for various test areas, use blueprints in the ceilometer project rather than tempest. -David ___ 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] [Ceilometer][Tempest]Tracking of blueprints and changes
On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 8:57 PM, Nadya Privalova nprival...@mirantis.comwrote: Hello guys! I hope all of you are enjoying the holidays! But I'd like to raise a Tempest question. Again. I hope this email will not be lost after vacations :) After the summit we decided to track all tests that are being created for Ceilometer in Tempest here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/add-basic-ceilometer-tests. Besides, we've created an etherpad page with a test plan https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ceilometer-test-plan. But it turned out that it works very bad. Now we have at least 3 change requests that have common functionality implemented. So we definitely need more reliable mechanism for tracking any changes. That's why I suggest to create a separate blueprint for each functionality. E.g. Ceilometer client for Tempest, Notification testing with several bps that depend on it (Swift notifications, Glance notifications, Nova notifications) and so on. In future we may vary the detail level of blueprints but now we need very detailed ones because different people have started to work on e.g. notifications. So there are the following action items: 1. Resolve all conflicts in changes that are on review now (see my comment to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/39237/ patch set 21 for more details) 2. Create set of blueprints from the testplan we have 3. Add Tempest discussions to Ceilometer weekly meeting agenda (done) So you might want to consider setting up something like this: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmYuZ6T4IJETdEVNTWlYVUVOWURmOERSZ0VGc1BBQWcusp=drive_web#gid=0 which was done for the Nova API testing where we have lots of people working on tests simultaneously but don't want people accidentally duplicating effort. Chris ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
