Re: [OSSTEST PATCH 1/9] README.dev: Document the blessings

[Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>]

On Thu, 2015-12-17 at 17:59 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [OSSTEST PATCH 1/9] README.dev: Document
> the blessings"):
> > On Thu, 2015-12-17 at 17:06 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > +Each flight has a `blessing' and an `intended blessing'.  The
> > > +`intended blessing' is what the flight is going to be blessed as
> when
> > > +its execution has completed.  The intended blessing controls
> host
> > > +allocation.
> > 
> > I think this could also usefully mention that `blessing' is the
> current
> > blessing, which may go through several phases during the life of
> the
> > flight, hopefully culminating in being set to `intended blessing'
> if the
> > flight is successful and that the archaeology tools only look at
> `blessing'
> > and never `intended blessing'
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > > +(Normally the `intended blessing' is the same as the bless
> argument to
> > > +sg-execute-flight aka the -B argument to mg-execute-flight.)
> > 
> > How does this interact with the intended blessing passed to cs
> -flight-
> > create?
> 
> So actually there a flight has three blessings.
> 
> > > + * `real-bisect' and `adhoc-bisect': These are found only as the
> > > +   blessing of finished flights.  (This is achieved by passing *
> -adhoc
> > > +   to sg-execute-flight.)  This allows the archaeologist tools
> to
> > > +   distinguish full flights from bisection steps.
> > 
> > I don't follow the reference to *-adhoc here, since it matches
> neither
> > `real-bisect' nor `adhoc-bisect'.
> 
> `Passing *-adhoc' should read `Passing *-bisect'.
> 
> > > +There is a special exception to the tools' flight status checks:
> any
> > > +flight whose blessing contains `play' can be operated on out of
> order.
> > > +
> > > +Flights blessings can be manually changed with cs-flight-bless. 
>  Eg
> > > +  ./cs-flight-bless FLIGHT broken-real real
> > > +updates FLIGHT to be marked `broken' rather than `real'.  This
> can be
> > 
> > The example says `broken-real' but the text says `broken' (if the
> text
> > didn't quote the `broken' it probably wouldn't matter.
> 
> I have clarified this.
> 
> > Maybe mention the need to pass the current blessing as a safety
> catch,
> > since it is part of the example command?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> squash! patch and complete v2, below.
> 
> Ian.
> 
> From 73903500006c0451cc81697872096fe2d6fe02ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> 2001
> From: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 17:58:41 +0000
> Subject: [OSSTEST PATCH] squash! README.dev: Document the blessings
> 
> v2: Improvements from review

Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>