From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: [Ceph-qa] 1 hung, 11 passed in teuthology-2015-02-11_16:13:01-samba-giant-distro-basic-multi Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2015 22:53:07 +0100 Message-ID: <54DFC3C3.7030701@dachary.org> References: <20150213035821.17712282150@teuthology.front.sepia.ceph.com> <54DEEC5C.4030605@dachary.org> <1611171464.18352749.1423930970636.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="AQ72r87W4P3hbvPaSgR9X7WRAjapE7E3l" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:44123 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754382AbbBNVxN (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Feb 2015 16:53:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1611171464.18352749.1423930970636.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Yuri Weinstein Cc: Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --AQ72r87W4P3hbvPaSgR9X7WRAjapE7E3l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Yuri, On 14/02/2015 17:22, Yuri Weinstein wrote: >> Yeah. Well, the last run alone isn't so important; we want to see a >> string of clean runs because a lot of issues aren't reproduced in >> every run. >=20 > My hope was that we can see all "green" results for say this giant rele= ase/backport, but I agree that we would need to make our go/no-go decisio= n based on multiple run results, as I am not sure if we can get them all = "green" due to complexity, time needed to execute, environment state etc.= =2E >=20 > We could thou modify our process a bit: > 1. after backport-branch is ready for QE, merge it to the named branch = (say 'giant' in this example) - that what we did now > 2. cut a release numbered brach (maybe it's tag, not sure), say "v0.87.= 1" > 3. run all QE suites on "v0.87.1" and get it to "all passed" state > 4. make sure that commits to "v0.87.1" are committed to the named branc= h ('giant')=20 That makes sense to me, only with s/v0.87.1/78c71b9200da5e7d832ec58765478= 404d31ae6b5/. > #2 is that we have not done this time. We have not done #2 but we have cut the branch at given SHA ( 78c71b9200d= a5e7d832ec58765478404d31ae6b5 ) instead, which is can be referenced by a = tag if and when it is released. In the mail "Re: giant integration branch= for v0.87.1 ready for QE" dated 11th february 2015 I wrote: > The giant-backports pull requests were merged into https://github.com/c= eph/ceph/tree/giant which is not ready for testing. > For the record, the head is https://github.com/ceph/ceph/commit/78c71b9= 200da5e7d832ec58765478404d31ae6b5 We cannot add a v0.87.1 tag to the branch before the release process is c= omplete because we won't be able to change it afterwards (people rely on = the fact that the history of the giant branch is not rewritten and that t= ags references are not changed). If during the QE test process we discove= r that a backport must be included (I'm thinking about https://github.com= /ceph/ceph/pull/3731 for instance), 78c71b9200da5e7d832ec58765478404d31ae= 6b5 won't be v0.87.1 after all. In a nutshell I think we're having the same view of the process, modulo t= he timing of the tagging of the release. Cheers >=20 > Thx > YuriW >=20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gregory Farnum" > To: "Loic Dachary" > Cc: "Ceph Development" > Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 11:56:18 PM > Subject: Re: [Ceph-qa] 1 hung, 11 passed in teuthology-2015-02-11_16:13= :01-samba-giant-distro-basic-multi >=20 > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Loic Dachary wrote= : >> Hi Greg, >> >> I'm curious to know how you handle the flow of mails from QA runs. Her= e is a wild guess: >> >> * from time to time check that the nightlies run the suites that shoul= d be run >=20 > Uh, I guess? >=20 >> * read the ceph-qa reports daily >=20 > Yeah >=20 >> * for each failed job, either relate it to an issue or create one or d= eclare it noise >=20 > Yeah >=20 >> * if a job fails on an existing ticket store a link to the job if it's= rare occurrence and the cause is not yet known >=20 > Yeah, or just to make clear it's still happening or whatever >=20 >> * bi-weekly bug scrub makes sure no issue, old or new, is forgotten >=20 > Hopefully! >=20 >> * at release time you decide that it is ready based on: >> ** the list of urgent/immediate issues that you can browse to ensure n= o issue is a blocker >> ** the last run of each suite to ensure they are recent enough and env= ironmental noise did not permanently shadow anything >=20 > Yeah. Well, the last run alone isn't so important; we want to see a > string of clean runs because a lot of issues aren't reproduced in > every run. > -Greg > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" i= n > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >=20 --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --AQ72r87W4P3hbvPaSgR9X7WRAjapE7E3l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlTfw8MACgkQ8dLMyEl6F226nQCgmYhEWJGowsOm/eFTwv8ZMpdZ X4UAn1BQ/Q3kJejq7mNAmEte6lO6+qle =mdSY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --AQ72r87W4P3hbvPaSgR9X7WRAjapE7E3l--