openstack team mailing list archive

[Devin Carlen <devin.carlen@xxxxxxxxx>]

+1 for chef over debs!


On Jun 7, 2011, at 12:38 PM, Andy Smith wrote:

> Thanks for the update Monty :)
>  
>  That's just testing API in a VM though, and doesn't get us to testing
> actual bare-metal deployment or integration testing. At Rackspace, we
> have some machines set aside at the moment, and have had others offer
> chunks of machines to test various combinations of things. At its heart,
> the abstract version of this looks fairly identical to the smoketests
> job - pxe boot machines, shove version to be tested on them, run tests.
> However, there are several moving bits on the best way to actually do
> the how. At the moment, the fine folks at rPath have a Jenkins
> installing and testing rPath OpenStack images, so Mihai and I are going
> to look at getting that setup ported to our Jenkins. However, although
> that will be an excellent test of code, as our main target platform is
> Ubuntu, we're also looking at doing a straight-up cobbler install using
> generated .debs.
> 
> Jesse and I had already gotten quite far along using chef to do the provisioning of baremetal boxes once we'd pxe booted them into ubuntu, it seems like chef or puppet (our current preference is chef) should be used there as well instead of generated .debs.
> 
> At the moment the two closest things to being "official" installations for us (me? are the chef recipes and the nova.sh script (the nova.sh script obviously being only targeted at testing and dev though), those are what we use to verify that the system is functional and I think we'd like to use chef or puppet for baremetal deployments as well.
> 
> TL;DR: Can we focus on the chef recipes instead of on .debs?
> 
>  
> In any case, this is the bit which is still in the
> planning and discussion phase, but so far all of the conversations I've
> had with folks have been great - and I'd love to get more folks involved
> in that (thus this email)
> 
> However- latent goal here is that whatever mechanism we're having
> Jenkins use to deploy OpenStack onto real hardware should be consumable
> and one that actual people might actually use - otherwise what the heck
> are we testing?
> 
> Additionally, as you may have surmised, it is also a goal to run as much
> of this as possible from the OpenStack Jenkins, because that way we can
> as a project choose to incorporate as much of the feedback/results of
> various forms of testing directly in to branch testing/approval as we
> want. For some things (spinning up 20 node OpenStack clusters) doing it
> on every merge proposal or giving all devs the ability to click a button
> and have it run on their branch will likely be overkill - but if it
> turns out not to be, it would be great to have the ability to do it.
> 
> End goal is to have:
>  - publicly accessible and usable system for testing and build automation
>  - resources that it uses to spin up clouds in order to test them are
> themselves usable by people to spin up clouds
>  - tooling around this is done in a manner that makes us of and
> contributes back to existing projects (jenkins plugins, patches back to
> cobbler/orchestra/whatever)
> 
> If you didn't read my _other_ long email from a few moments ago, actual
> discussion of getting this done - and figuring out other people's
> needs/tools and how to integrate them - is hopefully happening next week
> right before the regular openstack-meeting. In the mean time, please
> either flame on right here in list, or ping me back personally.
> 
> Thanks everyone!
> Monty
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp