On 03/18/2014 12:09 PM, Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net > <mailto:s...@dague.net>> wrote: > > We've not required UCA for any other project to pass the gate. > > > > Is it that bad to have UCA in default devstack, as far as I know UCA is > the official way to do OpenStack on ubuntu, right?
Currently we can't use it because libvirt in UCA remains too buggy to
run under the gate. If we had it turned on we'd see an astronomical
failure rate.
That is hopefully getting fixed, thanks to a lot of leg work by dims, as
it's required a lot of chasing.
However, I still believe UCA remains problematic, because our
experiences to date are basically that the entrance criteria for content
in UCA is clearly less than the base distro. And we are very likely to
be broken by changes put into it, as seen by the inability to run our
tests on top of it.
So I'm still -1 at the point in making UCA our default run environment
until it's provably functional for a period of time. Because working
around upstream distro breaks is no fun.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
Samsung Research America
s...@dague.net / sean.da...@samsung.com
http://dague.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
