On 07/09/2013 12:41 PM, Antoni Segura Puimedon wrote:
I like the idea of having a label in the bottom part of the commit
that is:
METADATA: network
which would be your second proposal.
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eyal Edri" <eedri(a)redhat.com>
> To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel(a)ovirt.org>
> Cc: "infra" <infra(a)ovirt.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 11:38:51 AM
> Subject: [Engine-devel] 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'
> 2. adding a new label with relevant tags for the patch, called e.g
> 'METADATA: network, rest, virt'
>
> Jenkins jobs will then be able to parse that data and trigger only relevant
> jobs for it.
> this can also allow us to add more jobs per patch, an option that is very
> problematic today considering the amount of
> patches coming in to engine.
>
> Once agreed on a format, we'll be able to add a git hook to verify the
> validity of the commit msg. (similar to bug-url).
>
> if we're not 100% sure that the tags will cover all corner cases and we feel
> like we need to run the code on all jobs,
> we can a nightly job to run all the remaining jobs (but at least it won't run
> on every patch/commit).
>
> [1] <core | restapi | tools | history | engine | userportal | webadmin>:
>
>
> thoughts?
>
> Eyal Edri.
> _______________________________________________
> Engine-devel mailing list
> Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
>
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
+1 beside of letting CI know which tests to run (main goal) it will also
help people understand the scope and effect of the change on a quick look.
i think that we can do feature based
(live-snapshot,upgrade,live-migration...) or area base tagging
(virt,storage,network..), what do you think?