From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Loic Dachary Subject: Re: a home for backport snippets Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 12:01:22 +0100 Message-ID: <5641CE82.7020007@dachary.org> References: <563B5789.7050006@dachary.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="2chD0Rf4dQeeqdb8jGtwEI47RBfc0lMbn" Return-path: Received: from mail2.dachary.org ([91.121.57.175]:57956 "EHLO smtp.dmail.dachary.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752349AbbKJLBc (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2015 06:01:32 -0500 In-Reply-To: <563B5789.7050006@dachary.org> Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Abhishek Varshney , Abhishek L , Nathan Cutler Cc: Ceph Development This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --2chD0Rf4dQeeqdb8jGtwEI47RBfc0lMbn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, The new snippets home is at https://pypi.python.org/pypi/ceph-workbench a= nd http://ceph-workbench.dachary.org/root/ceph-workbench. The first snippet was merged by Nathan yesterday[1], the backport documen= tation updated accordingly[2], and I used it after merging half a dozen h= ammer backport that were approved a few days ago. Integration tests should provide the best help against regression we can = hope for (they spawn a redmine instance every time they run and use a ded= icated github user to create and destroy projects, pull requests etc.) an= d they are run on every merge request[3]. When integrated in ceph-workben= ch, the snippet is documented[4] and the implementation[5] is tested in f= ull[6]. The merits of 100% coverage are often disputed as overkill. IMHO = it's better to remove an untested line of code rather than taking the cha= nce that it grows into something that does not work (or possibly never wo= rked). In the case of this snippet, there is a dozen of safe guards and f= our lines of code to modify the issue. It would be bad to discover, after= modifying hundreds of issues in the Ceph tracker, that it never worked a= s expected. I'm sure we'll find ways to *not* do the right thing even wit= h integration tests. But we'll hopefully do the right thing more often ;-= ) I'm not sure how much time it will take us to convert all the snippets we= have, but it does not matter much as we can keep doing things manually i= n the meantime. Cheers P.S. We are using a GitLab instance, with an integrated CI, instead of gi= thub with a CI on jenkins.ceph.com roughly for the same reasons puppet-ce= ph is in https://github.com/openstack/puppet-ceph and uses the OpenStack = gates. We have no expertise on jenkins-job-builder[7] and the learning cu= rve is perceived as significantly higher than a GitLab with an integrated= CI[8]. We also want to share administrative permissions on the CI with a= ll members of the stable release team to share the maintenance workload. [1] backport-set-release http://ceph-workbench.dachary.org/root/ceph-work= bench/merge_requests/8 [2] Resolving an issue http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/wik= i/HOWTO_merge_commits_from_the_integration_branch#Resolving-the-matching-= issue [3] Continuous integration http://ceph-workbench.dachary.org/dachary/ceph= -workbench/builds/53 [4] Documentation http://ceph-workbench.dachary.org/root/ceph-workbench/m= erge_requests/8/diffs#9f3ebf1fc38506b66593397f3baac514d515c496_73_75 [5] Implementation http://ceph-workbench.dachary.org/root/ceph-workbench/= merge_requests/8/diffs#070f4537c6cef8a2dacef1911a7d39acd0ce1387_0_75 [6] Testing http://ceph-workbench.dachary.org/root/ceph-workbench/merge_r= equests/8/diffs#66bd83c5111f0ccc884ad791c4acaa926ab52c2a_0_64 [7] Jenkins Job Builder http://docs.openstack.org/infra/jenkins-job-build= er/=20 [8] Configuration of your builds with .gitlab-ci.yml http://doc.gitlab.co= m/ci/yaml/README.html On 05/11/2015 14:20, Loic Dachary wrote: > Hi, >=20 > Today, Nathan and I briefly discussed the idea of collecting the backpo= rt snippets that are archived in the wiki at http://tracker.ceph.com/proj= ects/ceph-releases/wiki/HOWTO. We all have copies on our local disks and = although they don't diverge much, this is not very sustainable. It was re= ally good as we established the backport workflows. And it would have bee= n immensely painful to maintain a proper software while we were changing = the workflow on a regular basis. But it looks like we now have something = stable. >=20 > Early this year ceph-workbench[1] was started with the idea of helping = with backports. It is a mostly empty shell we can now use to collect all = the snippets we have. Instead of adding set-release[2] to the script dire= ctory of Ceph, it would be a subcommand of ceph-workbench, like so: >=20 > ceph-workbench set-release --token $github_token --key $redmine_key >=20 > What do you think ? >=20 > Cheers >=20 > [1] https://pypi.python.org/pypi/ceph-workbench > [2] https://github.com/ceph/ceph/pull/6466 >=20 --=20 Lo=C3=AFc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre --2chD0Rf4dQeeqdb8jGtwEI47RBfc0lMbn 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) iEYEARECAAYFAlZBzoIACgkQ8dLMyEl6F23lrgCfVvAOCuStj3ymICZAF+8IvAkU 16IAoMWymHbRb14OedGQPnhdKvUYeddf =h4es -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2chD0Rf4dQeeqdb8jGtwEI47RBfc0lMbn--