Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Plugin and Driver Inclusion Requirements

2013-11-19 Thread Tomoe Sugihara
Hello Neutron team, From the Testing Requirements section, Tempest is mentioned as a requirement. Does that mean all the thirdparty vendors' system should run all the tests in Tempest? It might not make perfect sense to test image API for changes in the neutron code. So can we define some subset

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Plugin and Driver Inclusion Requirements

2013-11-18 Thread Kyle Mestery (kmestery)
Yong, if you read Mark's proposal closely, the third party tests will only run when the specific third party code is touched, or when the Jenkins user submits code. On Nov 17, 2013, at 11:50 PM, Yongsheng Gong gong...@unitedstack.com wrote: For third party testing, I am afraid these tests

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Plugin and Driver Inclusion Requirements

2013-11-18 Thread Russell Bryant
On 11/18/2013 08:42 AM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) wrote: Yong, if you read Mark's proposal closely, the third party tests will only run when the specific third party code is touched, or when the Jenkins user submits code. On Nov 17, 2013, at 11:50 PM, Yongsheng Gong gong...@unitedstack.com

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Plugin and Driver Inclusion Requirements

2013-11-17 Thread Yongsheng Gong
For third party testing, I am afraid these tests will make the patch merge process much longer since each patch, which even has nothing to do with the specific plugins, will triggers the unwanted third party testing jobs. On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 4:20 AM, Mark McClain

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Plugin and Driver Inclusion Requirements

2013-11-15 Thread Salvatore Orlando
I also completely agree with this policy - and I hope all the developers contributing code to non-core plugins like me will agree as well. There is nothing like verifiability. This will also make a lot easier code reviews for non-core plugins; one of the reasons for which these reviews tend to