Alright, my worry is that nodepool and zuul integrations are a bit undertested atm. Looks like you want to address this, so I'm happy with that!
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Tristan Cacqueray <[email protected]> wrote: > On 03/29/2017 04:44 PM, Matthieu Huin wrote: > > well at least the nodepool playbook... And we didn't catch it because it > is > > only run daily with the preprod. I'd like to see the nested cloud tests > > back in the gate to avoid this. > > Heh, the error is fixed by > https://softwarefactory-project.io/r/#/c/7162/10/health-check/playbooks/ > sfconfig_nodepool_setup.yaml > > The health-check is failing because the last configuration refactor put > cloud provider in os-client-config instead of nodepool.yaml directly. > > > Would it be possible to focus some effort > > on this by next sprint ? > > > > Sure, but I would prefer we focus on nodepool-builder instead, the patch > has been ready for review for a week already... > Then I don't think the whole image-build/image-upload is that worthy to > gate on in the CI, with the new piece in place we could inject a > pre-build slave dib in nodepool database and focus testing on > zuul/nodepool integration. But to do that, we need those new piece in > place :) > > -Tristan > > > _______________________________________________ > Softwarefactory-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/softwarefactory-dev > >
_______________________________________________ Softwarefactory-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/softwarefactory-dev
