> -Original Message-
> From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 12:25 PM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Alex Huang
Hi,
On 8/20/14 12:24 PM, "Erik Weber" wrote:
>They both had fundamental flaws, where the one was
>practically useless for a week or so, and the other had major issues with
>KVM, and if the BVT doesn't encounter those because it's using the
>simulator I see it as a burden rather than a gift, sin
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Alex Huang wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This is something I brought up a long time ago but really didn't have the
> resources to get it all up and running until now. Throughout the past
> year, Edison, Prasanna, Amogh, Bharat, Koushik, Talluri, and others have
> been chip
Bumping up this thread since another one seems to be starting over CI
Amogh
On 5/27/14 8:28 PM, "David Nalley" wrote:
>On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Alex Huang
>wrote:
>>> Like Chip, I am very concerned with this being dependent on a single
>>> company, even if its the company that employs
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Alex Huang wrote:
>> Like Chip, I am very concerned with this being dependent on a single
>> company, even if its the company that employs me. It isn't sustainable, it
>> excludes others from contributing, and makes the project less independent
>> because it depen
> Like Chip, I am very concerned with this being dependent on a single
> company, even if its the company that employs me. It isn't sustainable, it
> excludes others from contributing, and makes the project less independent
> because it depends on a single company's infrastructure.
Agreed there.
> @Chip and @Hugo
>
>> Correct, and my statement stands. I'm -1 on any policy within the project
>> that enforces the use of a single company's resources if they are only
>> controlled by that company. Let's see how we can move this to the ASF (and
>> tweak / tune based on a better understanding
Sorry for the late replies on this folks. I've been away for my $dayjob at
Citrix. Let me try to see if I can make clear what I see as
objections/questions/understandings and address them one by one. If I got them
wrong, let me know and please clarify what you're asking.
@Sebastien
> Why don
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi
wrote:
>
>>
>> I'll also state for the record, that I will -1 any decision that leads us to
>> depend on a single company's infrastructure as a project level policy. That
>> said, having it available from Citrix for use is a great thing for that
>
> I'll also state for the record, that I will -1 any decision that leads us to
> depend on a single company's infrastructure as a project level policy. That
> said, having it available from Citrix for use is a great thing for that
> company
> to donate! It's going to be difficult to balance o
> -Original Message-
> From: sebgoa [mailto:run...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:30 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
>
>
> On May 21, 2014, at 12:40 AM,
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 2:30 AM, sebgoa wrote:
> Why don't Citrix developers show us how they would do it in the open ? Right
> now it's all hidden.
+1 - I like some of the concepts of this proposal, but I have some
concerns as well.
I'll also state for the record, that I will -1 any decision t
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Trippie [mailto:trip...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Hugo Trippaers
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 12:32 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
>>
k.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
>
> Hey Alex,
>
> Nice job on getting this all done and working on some guidelines to improve
> quality of the overal guidelines. We discussed a lot of these things at the
: Thursday, May 15, 2014 5:01 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
quality...
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 06:21:34PM +, Alex Huang wrote:
> > I think infrastructure code should just be checked in with the source
>
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Donal Lafferty
wrote:
> Can we introduce a penalty points system to get them to slow down?
>
> E.g. 3 pts / offence, mandatory 3rd party code reviewers after 15 over two
> releases cycles?
Penalty will only work in combination with positive incentives. If not
pe
On 14-May-2014, at 3:33 AM, Amogh Vasekar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 5/13/14 1:04 AM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote:
>
>> If I understood Alex' page on the wiki correctly you can run against
>> your own fork.
>
> I think Non-committers can't have a feature branch on git (at least I
> can't create one)
>
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 06:21:34PM +, Alex Huang wrote:
> > I think infrastructure code should just be checked in with the source
> > code. To separate it means you have to deal with version
> > match/mismatch between infrastructure and source code.
>
> Sorry - that doesn't sound right. Usu
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 09:01:16PM +, Alex Huang wrote:
> > On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 06:21:34PM +, Alex Huang wrote:
> > > I think infrastructure code should just be checked in with the source
> > > code. To separate it means you have to deal with version
> > > match/mismatch between infras
Alex,
I applaud the effort and everybody at Citrix contributing to it.
This is not a concern with your proposed process: I hope it does not
impede the efforts to have a distributed setup where everybody can
start their tests specific to their hardware from the central jenkins
on their local jenkin
Hi Ritu,
Citrix will provide a Jenkins server that's public accessible that enables you
to request BVT to be run on your branch. You don't need to install one
yourself. When ASF infra is ready with their hardware, the scripts can be
donated to ASF and then developers will need to switch over
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 06:21:34PM +, Alex Huang wrote:
> I think infrastructure code should just be checked in with the
> source code. To separate it means you have to deal with version
> match/mismatch between infrastructure and source code.
Sorry - that doesn't sound right. Usually infra
Hey Alex,
Nice job on getting this all done and working on some guidelines to improve
quality of the overal guidelines. We discussed a lot of these things at the
last CCC and i’m happy to see them here.
I do have some feedback on the policy though.
Specifically with the line stating “No merges
How about some gamification? :)
Continuous integration allows devs to gage whether they're coding too fast for
quality conditions. Can we introduce a penalty points system to get them to
slow down?
E.g. 3 pts / offence, mandatory 3rd party code reviewers after 15 over two
releases cycles?
>
Thanks Alex for the information!
-Original Message-
From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 2:56 PM
To: Ritu Sabharwal
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
quality...
Hi Ritu
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 10:25 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
>
> Infrastructure code related changes done\in progress, related to this
> proposal, currently are maintained in a
uesday, May 13, 2014 3:08 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
>
> Sorry, I take that back. Misunderstood the "fork" to be "feature" branch on
> cloudstack git.
>
> Amogh
&g
lex.hu...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 3:43 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
>
> Noji,
>
> Everything should be checked in under tools. I'll make sure
let the reviewer put it through CI for you.
"
--Alex
> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 1:04 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
&
On May 6, 2014, at 8:03 PM, Alex Huang wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This is something I brought up a long time ago but really didn't have the
> resources to get it all up and running until now. Throughout the past year,
> Edison, Prasanna, Amogh, Bharat, Koushik, Talluri, and others have been
> chi
@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
quality...
Noji,
Everything should be checked in under tools. I'll make sure of that. None of
the code/configuration should be private.
--Alex
> -Original Message-
>
Hi,
On 5/13/14 1:04 AM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote:
>If I understood Alex' page on the wiki correctly you can run against
>your own fork.
I think Non-committers can't have a feature branch on git (at least I
can't create one)
Thanks,
Amogh
2014 8:20 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
>
> Alex,
>
> Thank you for interesting proposal. I suppose pre check-in test is long-
> awaited for everyone.
> I'm looking
Sorry, I take that back. Misunderstood the "fork" to be "feature" branch
on cloudstack git.
Amogh
On 5/13/14 3:03 PM, "Amogh Vasekar" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 5/13/14 1:04 AM, "Daan Hoogland" wrote:
>
>>If I understood Alex' page on the wiki correctly you can run against
>>your own fork.
>
>I think N
Alex,
Thank you for interesting proposal. I suppose pre check-in test is
long-awaited for everyone.
I'm looking forward to see your Jenkins made public.
If possible, can you share jenkins job's settings.xml for future
reference when it is ready?
Regards,
Noji
2014-05-13 2:04 GMT-06:00 Daan Hoog
Alex, (see inline)
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Alex Huang wrote:
...
> For the concern on distributed setup, there's a two part answer.
> 1. We're basically asking everyone to use a central Jenkins to run the
> automated before they merge to the asf git repository to make sure they
> did
Ritu,
If I understood Alex' page on the wiki correctly you can run against
your own fork.
@Alex: true?
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Ritu Sabharwal wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> I am a new developer (non-commiter) and getting to learn about the
> development process of CloudStack.
>
> I have a questi
continue to update the
list.
--Alex
> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 3:34 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Using continuous integration to maintain our code
> quality...
>
> Alex,
Hi Alex,
I am a new developer (non-commiter) and getting to learn about the development
process of CloudStack.
I have a question about the Jenkins, when you say create a branch for your code
and ask Jenkins to run BVT on your branch. The branch will be created on my
local repository but Jenki
39 matches
Mail list logo
