[Engine-devel] Proposal for new commit msg design for engine commits

[Moran Goldboim]

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 at redhat.com>
>> To: "engine-devel" <engine-devel at ovirt.org>
>> Cc: "infra" <infra at 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 at ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Engine-devel mailing list
> Engine-devel at 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?