----- Original Message -----
From: "Yair Zaslavsky" <yzaslavs@redhat.com> To: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> Cc: "Eyal Edri" <eedri@redhat.com>, "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 3:42:24 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine commits
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alon Bar-Lev" <alonbl@redhat.com> To: "Eyal Edri" <eedri@redhat.com> Cc: "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org>, "infra" <infra@ovirt.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 3:33:57 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine commits
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eyal Edri" <eedri@redhat.com> To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel@ovirt.org> Cc: "infra" <infra@ovirt.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 12:38:51 PM Subject: Proposal for new commit msg design for engine commits
Hi,
You all probably know and familiar with 'ovirt-engine' git hook for commit msg template [1]. this helps understand the general area of the patch in the project but it lacks additional info that might be valuable for scaling automatic tests in Jenkins CI.
Let me explain:
Infra team is working hard on expanding oVirt CI infrastructure and adding more tests in jenkins (per commit/patch). Adding important meta-data per patch can significatly improve the ability to run specific tests for each patch/commit, and not waste valuable resources on Jenkins jobs that are not relevant to the code in the patch.
So the idea is to add/expand current metadata per patch, in the form of: (either) 1. expanding current header template to include more data like 'network' , 'setup', 'tools', 'virt'
Please do not expand header, it is too short anyway.
2. adding a new label with relevant tags for the patch, called e.g 'METADATA: network, rest, virt'
Having:
CI-Tests: xxx CI-Tests: yyy CI-Tests: zzz
Is much better.
I'm not sure we should have CI-Test - as we might use this for something else besides CI. Region_of_Interest as Dan suggests sounds better IMHO.
I don't care how this is to be called. However, I do not think that commit message is the place for instructing CI to do anything. Commit message stays for good, it should contain information that is required a year from now. It has nothing to do with tests and such.
However, I don't think that it is the responsibility of the committer.
I suggested some time ago to have metadata information within each source.
Each source should have metadata of:
1. Maintainer group.
Not sure if this is always relevant, what if i'm fixing some unit test that got broken? it's enough to know I'm a maintainer, no?
Drop the maintainer, it is a suggestion of extra metadata we can add to automatically CC relevant people. Add more metadata, so that every change in that file will trigger specific tests.
2. Subsystem. 3. Any other relevant.
This way you can act automatically using this information.
Java: /* * $OVIRT_METADATA.COMPONENT=<string> */ or: // $OVIRT_METADATA.COMPONENT=<string>
Shell/python: # $OVIRT_METADATA.COMPONENT=<string>
Well, you get the idea...
This signature will allow: a. find . -type f | xargs grep '\$OVIRT_METADATA.COMPONENT=mycomponent' b. Future automation within gerrit.
Regards, Alon _______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel