Thank you Alec, and let’s work together to that direction.

Bin

From: Alec Hothan (ahothan) <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 1:22 PM
To: HU, BIN <[email protected]>; [email protected]; 
opnfv-project-leads <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Experimenting Cloud Service (GitHub + CircleCI) 
Recommended by TAC Infra WG

I would be interested to participate (NFVbench project). I am actually willing 
to try anything that moves us away from releng repo and JJB.

I would like to point out that the current CI/CD based on Jenkins is not 
providing sufficient permission for PTLs to customize as almost every aspect of 
CI/CD is based on the releng repo which requires lengthy turnaround time when 
the releng team is busy doing other work.

One example is a gerrit review I submitted about 7 days ago and still waiting 
for a review from the releng team. I have to generate new VM image versions in 
my CI/CD and such a simple task has proved difficult to achieve or adjust with 
the current framework.
Same goes with docker images generated in dockerhub and for which PTLs have no 
way to customize (e.g. remove stale images, edit the project dockerhub 
description content etc…) as it is owned by “opnfv”. I think these will get 
resolved with patience but I would have taken care of these roadblocks easily 
if I had more control on the CI/CD workflow for my project.

Using Jenkins as the CI/CD base engine might provide good support for exiting 
opnfv projects but my own experience with it has not been good overall as it 
relies on knowing the arcane behavior of JJB (Jenkins job builder) which is not 
exactly very intuitive, especially we have little way of testing our changes 
without involving the releng team and doing trial commits into the releng repo. 
The releng team has been doing a great job trying to keep up with the reviews 
generally but I don’t think we can continue that path to have releng team gate 
every single aspect of a project CI/CD, especially with less and less resources 
allocated to that task.
The only scalable way moving forward is to give more power to PTLs so they can 
customize their CI/CD as much as possible without having to depend on a third 
party team.

I hope the new proposal will move us to that direction.

Thanks

Alec

From: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf 
of "HU, BIN" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Friday, June 7, 2019 at 10:59 AM
To: 
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
 opnfv-project-leads 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [opnfv-tsc] Experimenting Cloud Service (GitHub + CircleCI) 
Recommended by TAC Infra WG

Hello PTLs and Community,

Following TAC Infra WG’s recommendation of the path of infrastructure evolution 
[1], and TAC’s discussion on May 22nd [2], TSC discussed this topic at our TSC 
meeting on May 28th.

According to OPNFV TSC Meeting on May 28th [3], OPNFV TSC “AGREED: The TSC 
agrees with the recommendation from the TAC infra WG and will investigate how 
best to implement the recommendation within OPNFV.”

We are starting the effort of investigating the implementation and transition 
plan. We will set up experimental repos in GitHub, and experiment project’s 
integration with CircleCI there. Some experts who already have experimented in 
TAC Infra WG, e.g. ONAP CLAMP, FD.io VPP, etc., will be able to help us.

For those projects or anyone who are interested in participating in this 
experiment, please contact me directly.

Thank you and have a great weekend.
Bin

[1] 
https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/display/LN/Infrastructure+Working+Group+Summary+Report<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.lfnetworking.org_display_LN_Infrastructure-2BWorking-2BGroup-2BSummary-2BReport&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=02QlmWDbMjTwco1D6Px6HM64AQeSU4XTT_MhNIFU8NE&s=tif_sR36GE7XFaCRJgBYoXt19LTBW4PdVCxM969xL3A&e=>
[2] 
https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/display/LN/2019-05-22+Meeting+notes<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.lfnetworking.org_display_LN_2019-2D05-2D22-2BMeeting-2Bnotes&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=02QlmWDbMjTwco1D6Px6HM64AQeSU4XTT_MhNIFU8NE&s=ZZqTlMn_U_0vMXiiVW-qB_H5cRaJAzvykQdq_7-3Ma0&e=>
[3] 
http://meetbot.opnfv.org/meetings/opnfv-meeting/2019/opnfv-meeting.2019-05-28-12.55.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__meetbot.opnfv.org_meetings_opnfv-2Dmeeting_2019_opnfv-2Dmeeting.2019-2D05-2D28-2D12.55.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=02QlmWDbMjTwco1D6Px6HM64AQeSU4XTT_MhNIFU8NE&s=bMbDP9jdzMnqCDGDm6gbNYL94T63wSpweDHDAtolxr8&e=>


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#23225): 
https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/23225
Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/31978733/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/unsub  
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to