Actively triggering of CI jobs

[Amit Aviram]

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Eyal Edri <eedri at redhat.com> wrote:

> +1,
> this will be the best suggestion.
> we can try adding a manual trigger for drafts if needed, still need to
> check if possible.
>
> e.
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Eli Mesika <emesika at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Barak Korren" <bkorren at redhat.com>
>> > To: "Amit Aviram" <aaviram at redhat.com>
>> > Cc: "infra" <infra at ovirt.org>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, December 8, 2015 5:16:30 PM
>> > Subject: Re: Actively triggering of CI jobs
>> >
>> > > I was thinking, maybe it would be better if we will explicitly
>> require to
>> > > run the CI jobs when we push patches.. then only when the developer
>> will
>> > > need the job's feedback it will be activated. no redundant jobs will
>> run,
>> > > and we will wait much less for the jobs to finish when we will
>> actually
>> > > need
>> > > them.
>>
>> Why not simply submit your patches as a Draft until the point you want CI
>> to run on them, then you can simply publish them ...
>> This is the way I am using and it's simple ...
>>
>> > >
>> > It seems to me that it will me too easy to forget to run the CI this
>> way.
>>
> We barely merge patches that did not pass the CI tests.. only if it fails
on general errors that doesn't belong the patch's context. but it is part
of the developing process, we can't just forget to using it. that means
that it is mandatory to run it at some point if a developer wants his
patches to be merged. which means the developer runs it *only* when it is
ready to be merged. (much much less triggered jobs!)


> >
>> > There is another way though - To make the jobs do a lot less work.
>> > Most anything has to do what what actually happens in CI resides in
>> > the project`s automation directory now days (see [1]).  If you want to
>> > make CI smarter so it will not do things it shouldn't be doing, all
>> > you need to do is customize the automation scripts to be smarter and
>> > run only the needed tests for the files that were changed by the
>> > patch.
>> >
>> > [1]: http://www.ovirt.org/CI/Build_and_test_standards
>> >
>>
> That's nice, but most of us are not aware of all that..


> > --
>> > Barak Korren
>> > bkorren at redhat.com
>> > RHEV-CI Team
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Infra mailing list
>> > Infra at ovirt.org
>> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Infra mailing list
>> Infra at ovirt.org
>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Eyal Edri
> Supervisor, RHEV CI
> EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D
> Red Hat Israel
>
> phone: +972-9-7692018
> irc: eedri (on #tlv #rhev-dev #rhev-integ)
>

>From what I'm seeing, most of the developers here don't make their patches
drafts.. moreover,
- personally I didn't even know that it will not trigger jobs if it is a
draft. (and I'm not the only one)
- sometimes I need to label my patches, therefor can't make it a draft

nowadays we are waiting for the jobs too much to finish. and the reality is
that too much jobs shouldn't run at all- despite all of the nice things you
guys show here..

I still think that it will be a better solution to force the developer to
activate the tests manually (by adding a flag when pushing or even doing it
with the jenkins client..)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ovirt.org/pipermail/infra/attachments/20151209/b7bc9e0b/attachment.html>