Hello,
Status update for Dec, 5-6 - we're on track.
CentOS7 based ISO looks good, we are building it on product CI using
the same jobs as for CentOS6.
ISO #258 passed nightly swarm with a slightly reduced coverage (69%).
We've got one known issue [0] that affects some jobs when run on a
loaded s
Great progress, thank you for keeping everyone informed.
On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 4:43 PM Dmitry Teselkin
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Status update for Dec, 4 - we're on track.
>
> As there were no significant issues found during BVT / swarm test runs
> on custom CentOS7 ISO it was decided to go with merg
Hello,
Status update for Dec, 4 - we're on track.
As there were no significant issues found during BVT / swarm test runs
on custom CentOS7 ISO it was decided to go with merge party and merge
all CentOS7 related CRs. Our CI was partially updated then and we
started building ISO using production jo
Hello,
According to the CentOS7 merging plan we've merged all CentOS7 CRs and
are going to get our first builds in production CI.
Please note that failures are possible for short period of time, please
don't panic, we will keep an eye on every build to investigate and fix
ASAP. We will send anoth
Hello,
Status update for Dec, 3 - we're on track.
There were issues with passing swarm test in the beginning of the day
caused by various reasons, not all of them related to CentOS7 itself.
We've fixed all issues we've found, at EOD we've got several
successful ISOs built from master (with our pa
Hello,
Here is our status (Dec, 2).
We are on track now.
This (Dec, 2) morning we've got results of 6 tests (swarm) - 3
succeeded, 3 failed. Failures were caused issues in ISO and QA scripts,
and were fixed during the day. In the end of the day (Dec, 2) we've got
another green custom ISO, which
We need to run the normal Swarm on Thu to assess the damage from the FF
merge party. If we manage to run a custom Swarm in parallel with that, we
should, but normal Swarm takes priority. If we can't run custom Swarm on
Thu, we have to rely on the results from normal Swarm on Fri.
On Dec 2, 2015 10
Dmitry,
thank you!
I confirm that the plan looks good for our team, we'll follow it.
Regards,
Igor Marnat
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:39 PM, Andrew Maksimov
wrote:
> Thank you Dmitry for very detailed plan and risks assessment.
> Do we want to run swarm against custom iso with centos7 on Thu even
Thank you Dmitry for very detailed plan and risks assessment.
Do we want to run swarm against custom iso with centos7 on Thu evening to
measure level of regression? I remember that we were considering this
approach.
Regards,
Andrey Maximov
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Dmitry Borodaenko wrot
With bit more details, I hope this covers all the risks and decision
points now.
First of all, current list of outstanding commits:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel_on_centos7
The above list has two sections: backwards compatible changes that can
be merged one at a time even if the rest of C
Hi,
in your plan you need to have an item about updating ISO on fuel-library CI
gates.
Regards,
Alex
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Dmitry Teselkin
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> We're almost got green BVT on custom CentOS7 ISO a
Hi,
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Dmitry Teselkin
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We're almost got green BVT on custom CentOS7 ISO and it seems that it's
> the time to discuss the plan how this feature could be merged.
>
> This is not the only one feature that is in a queue. Unfortunately,
> almost any ot
Hello,
We're almost got green BVT on custom CentOS7 ISO and it seems that it's
the time to discuss the plan how this feature could be merged.
This is not the only one feature that is in a queue. Unfortunately,
almost any other feature will be broken if merged after CentOS7, so it
was decided to m
13 matches
Mail list logo
