On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:47 PM Kamil Paral kparal@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:39 AM Sinny Kumari ksinny@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:19 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
Or could we move f29+ all to whatever is replacing it? (taskotron?)
It will be nice but I am not aware of any other system in place which would replace checks performed by autocloud.
(CC'ed tflink and kparal) Does taskotron provides capability to perform tests on Fedora cloud Images like booting images and other basic checks?
Theoretically it is possible using nested virt. However, Taskotron is going away as well. The replacement is Fedora CI: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/
Thanks kamil! yeah, it doesn't make sense to move to Taskotron if it is going to be deprecated as well.
I recommend to ask in the CI list: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ci%40lists.fedoraproject.org/
It should be possible for them to provide the infrastructure you need.
Hmm, I am not very sure if we should spend time investigating and setting up alternative to autocloud unless we have usecases for long run. Fedora Atomic Host Two Week releases ends with F29 EOL.
On 4/29/19 9:27 AM, Sinny Kumari wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:47 PM Kamil Paral <kparal@redhat.com mailto:kparal@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:39 AM Sinny Kumari <ksinny@gmail.com <mailto:ksinny@gmail.com>> wrote: On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:19 AM Kevin Fenzi <kevin@scrye.com <mailto:kevin@scrye.com>> wrote: Or could we move f29+ all to whatever is replacing it? (taskotron?) It will be nice but I am not aware of any other system in place which would replace checks performed by autocloud. (CC'ed tflink and kparal) Does taskotron provides capability to perform tests on Fedora cloud Images like booting images and other basic checks? Theoretically it is possible using nested virt. However, Taskotron is going away as well. The replacement is Fedora CI: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/Thanks kamil! yeah, it doesn't make sense to move to Taskotron if it is going to be deprecated as well.
I recommend to ask in the CI list: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ci%40lists.fedoraproject.org/ It should be possible for them to provide the infrastructure you need.Hmm, I am not very sure if we should spend time investigating and setting up alternative to autocloud unless we have usecases for long run. Fedora Atomic Host Two Week releases ends with F29 EOL.
I would say let's keep it around until we EOL f29 Atomic Host. Let's not put any investment into it or migrating it elsewhere.
Dusty
I would say let's keep it around until we EOL f29 Atomic Host. Let's not put any investment into it or migrating it elsewhere.
Agreed, let's keep it till when it's needed and not worry about it's successor.
Reviving this thread
Recently Fedora 29 went EOL [1] and with that we also did final Fedora Atomic Host release and its EOL announcement [2] . I think we should be good with deprecating autocloud now unless we want to keep using it for running tests on Fedora Cloud images.
Thanks, Sinny
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedorapro... [2] https://lists.projectatomic.io/projectatomic-archives/atomic-devel/2019-Dece...
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 1:00 PM Sayan Chowdhury gmail@yudocaa.in wrote:
I would say let's keep it around until we EOL f29 Atomic Host. Let's not
put any investment into it or migrating
it elsewhere.
Agreed, let's keep it till when it's needed and not worry about it's successor.
-- Sayan Chowdhury https://words.yudocaa.in/ GPG Fingerprint : 0F16 E841 E517 225C 7D13 AB3C B023 9931 9CD0 5C8B _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Thu, 2019-12-05 at 14:44 +0530, Sinny Kumari wrote:
Reviving this thread
Recently Fedora 29 went EOL [1] and with that we also did final Fedora Atomic Host release and its EOL announcement [2] . I think we should be good with deprecating autocloud now unless we want to keep using it for running tests on Fedora Cloud images.
It's already done, Kevin turned it off several days ago.
openQA is now running the autocloud tests on Cloud_Base qcow2 images, e.g. https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/overview?distri=fedora&version=30... .
On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 12:21 AM Adam Williamson adamwill@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, 2019-12-05 at 14:44 +0530, Sinny Kumari wrote:
Reviving this thread
Recently Fedora 29 went EOL [1] and with that we also did final Fedora Atomic Host release and its EOL announcement [2] . I think we should be good with deprecating autocloud now unless we want
to
keep using it for running tests on Fedora Cloud images.
It's already done, Kevin turned it off several days ago.
openQA is now running the autocloud tests on Cloud_Base qcow2 images, e.g. https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/overview?distri=fedora&version=30... .
That's awesome to know! Seems like I missed the news :)
Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 18:57 +0530, Sinny Kumari wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:47 PM Kamil Paral kparal@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:39 AM Sinny Kumari ksinny@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:19 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
Or could we move f29+ all to whatever is replacing it? (taskotron?)
It will be nice but I am not aware of any other system in place which would replace checks performed by autocloud.
(CC'ed tflink and kparal) Does taskotron provides capability to perform tests on Fedora cloud Images like booting images and other basic checks?
Theoretically it is possible using nested virt. However, Taskotron is going away as well. The replacement is Fedora CI: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/
Thanks kamil! yeah, it doesn't make sense to move to Taskotron if it is going to be deprecated as well.
I recommend to ask in the CI list: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ci%40lists.fedoraproject.org/
It should be possible for them to provide the infrastructure you need.
Hmm, I am not very sure if we should spend time investigating and setting up alternative to autocloud unless we have usecases for long run. Fedora Atomic Host Two Week releases ends with F29 EOL.
We could run these tests in openQA pretty easily, I think. The question is, I guess, whether they will still be of value for Fedora CoreOS.
I guess to me the real job Autocloud is doing is this: "make sure the images we intend people to use to run Fedora instances in the cloud basically work and can do some simple tasks people tend to do with such images". If the Fedora CoreOS team already is covering this some other way, or intends to cover it some other way before Fedora CoreOS becomes a supported thing, then we probably don't need to preserve the Autocloud tests. If this is not in scope for the Fedora CoreOS team...we probably still need to do it somewhere else.
So...has anyone asked the Fedora CoreOS team what the plans here are? :)
On 5/1/19 10:20 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 18:57 +0530, Sinny Kumari wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:47 PM Kamil Paral kparal@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:39 AM Sinny Kumari ksinny@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:19 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
Or could we move f29+ all to whatever is replacing it? (taskotron?)
It will be nice but I am not aware of any other system in place which would replace checks performed by autocloud.
(CC'ed tflink and kparal) Does taskotron provides capability to perform tests on Fedora cloud Images like booting images and other basic checks?
Theoretically it is possible using nested virt. However, Taskotron is going away as well. The replacement is Fedora CI: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/
Thanks kamil! yeah, it doesn't make sense to move to Taskotron if it is going to be deprecated as well.
I recommend to ask in the CI list: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ci%40lists.fedoraproject.org/
It should be possible for them to provide the infrastructure you need.
Hmm, I am not very sure if we should spend time investigating and setting up alternative to autocloud unless we have usecases for long run. Fedora Atomic Host Two Week releases ends with F29 EOL.
We could run these tests in openQA pretty easily, I think. The question is, I guess, whether they will still be of value for Fedora CoreOS.
I guess to me the real job Autocloud is doing is this: "make sure the images we intend people to use to run Fedora instances in the cloud basically work and can do some simple tasks people tend to do with such images". If the Fedora CoreOS team already is covering this some other way, or intends to cover it some other way before Fedora CoreOS becomes a supported thing, then we probably don't need to preserve the Autocloud tests. If this is not in scope for the Fedora CoreOS team...we probably still need to do it somewhere else.
So...has anyone asked the Fedora CoreOS team what the plans here are? :)
We plan to have testing at various stages of the CoreOS build and delivery pipeline. We definitely plan to have FCOS taken care of using the existing kola testing utility [1] that was in use previously for container linux.
With that said, one thing that has previously been out of scope for kola is testing instances that aren't provisioned with ignition (i.e. they use cloud-init instead). Today the Fedora Cloud base images are not provisioned using ignition so we'll either need to consider adding ignition as an option there OR consider running automated tests against the Fedora Cloud base images in OpenQA (if that's possible).
Dusty
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:48 PM Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
On 5/1/19 10:20 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 18:57 +0530, Sinny Kumari wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:47 PM Kamil Paral kparal@redhat.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:39 AM Sinny Kumari ksinny@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:19 AM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
Or could we move f29+ all to whatever is replacing it? (taskotron?)
It will be nice but I am not aware of any other system in place which would replace checks performed by autocloud.
(CC'ed tflink and kparal) Does taskotron provides capability to perform tests on Fedora cloud Images like booting images and other basic checks?
Theoretically it is possible using nested virt. However, Taskotron is going away as well. The replacement is Fedora CI: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/
Thanks kamil! yeah, it doesn't make sense to move to Taskotron if it is going to be deprecated as well.
I recommend to ask in the CI list: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ci%40lists.fedoraproject.org/
It should be possible for them to provide the infrastructure you need.
Hmm, I am not very sure if we should spend time investigating and setting up alternative to autocloud unless we have usecases for long run. Fedora Atomic Host Two Week releases ends with F29 EOL.
We could run these tests in openQA pretty easily, I think. The question is, I guess, whether they will still be of value for Fedora CoreOS.
I guess to me the real job Autocloud is doing is this: "make sure the images we intend people to use to run Fedora instances in the cloud basically work and can do some simple tasks people tend to do with such images". If the Fedora CoreOS team already is covering this some other way, or intends to cover it some other way before Fedora CoreOS becomes a supported thing, then we probably don't need to preserve the Autocloud tests. If this is not in scope for the Fedora CoreOS team...we probably still need to do it somewhere else.
So...has anyone asked the Fedora CoreOS team what the plans here are? :)
We plan to have testing at various stages of the CoreOS build and delivery pipeline. We definitely plan to have FCOS taken care of using the existing kola testing utility [1] that was in use previously for container linux.
With that said, one thing that has previously been out of scope for kola is testing instances that aren't provisioned with ignition (i.e. they use cloud-init instead). Today the Fedora Cloud base images are not provisioned using ignition so we'll either need to consider adding ignition as an option there OR consider running automated tests against the Fedora Cloud base images in OpenQA (if that's possible).
It's all possible with OpenQA, the tests just have to be written. :)
On 5/2/19 12:08 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:48 PM Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
We plan to have testing at various stages of the CoreOS build and delivery pipeline. We definitely plan to have FCOS taken care of using the existing kola testing utility [1] that was in use previously for container linux.
With that said, one thing that has previously been out of scope for kola is testing instances that aren't provisioned with ignition (i.e. they use cloud-init instead). Today the Fedora Cloud base images are not provisioned using ignition so we'll either need to consider adding ignition as an option there OR consider running automated tests against the Fedora Cloud base images in OpenQA (if that's possible).
It's all possible with OpenQA, the tests just have to be written. :)
I don't know a whole lot about OpenQA but I'm interested to know: Is it easy to start a VM and attach metadata to it (i.e. support cloud-init)?
On Thu, 2019-05-02 at 10:15 -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 5/2/19 12:08 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:48 PM Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
We plan to have testing at various stages of the CoreOS build and delivery pipeline. We definitely plan to have FCOS taken care of using the existing kola testing utility [1] that was in use previously for container linux.
With that said, one thing that has previously been out of scope for kola is testing instances that aren't provisioned with ignition (i.e. they use cloud-init instead). Today the Fedora Cloud base images are not provisioned using ignition so we'll either need to consider adding ignition as an option there OR consider running automated tests against the Fedora Cloud base images in OpenQA (if that's possible).
It's all possible with OpenQA, the tests just have to be written. :)
I don't know a whole lot about OpenQA but I'm interested to know: Is it easy to start a VM and attach metadata to it (i.e. support cloud-init)?
I'd have to look into it, but it shouldn't be hard. Starting VMs is what it *does*, and if it can't support cloud-init already, I can add it. I'm on vacation till the 19th, will follow up on this later.
It would be a good idea if the actual tests can be shared between test systems as much as possible. I know the tests Autocloud ran were basically just bash scripts - openQA could easily use those. What do the tests run in kola look like?
There's also the question of whether we still want to ship/support the Cloud Base images. For now they are still release-blocking deliverables, but their status feels a little vague to me. It would be good to figure out for sure whether we still consider them important, if so why, and if so who is in charge of them.
On 5/2/19 12:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Thu, 2019-05-02 at 10:15 -0400, Dusty Mabe wrote:
On 5/2/19 12:08 AM, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:48 PM Dusty Mabe dusty@dustymabe.com wrote:
We plan to have testing at various stages of the CoreOS build and delivery pipeline. We definitely plan to have FCOS taken care of using the existing kola testing utility [1] that was in use previously for container linux.
With that said, one thing that has previously been out of scope for kola is testing instances that aren't provisioned with ignition (i.e. they use cloud-init instead). Today the Fedora Cloud base images are not provisioned using ignition so we'll either need to consider adding ignition as an option there OR consider running automated tests against the Fedora Cloud base images in OpenQA (if that's possible).
It's all possible with OpenQA, the tests just have to be written. :)
I don't know a whole lot about OpenQA but I'm interested to know: Is it easy to start a VM and attach metadata to it (i.e. support cloud-init)?
I'd have to look into it, but it shouldn't be hard. Starting VMs is what it *does*, and if it can't support cloud-init already, I can add it. I'm on vacation till the 19th, will follow up on this later.
Sounds good.
It would be a good idea if the actual tests can be shared between test systems as much as possible. I know the tests Autocloud ran were basically just bash scripts - openQA could easily use those. What do the tests run in kola look like?
They are embedded in kola itself. It's very much a focused tool for a single purpose.
There's also the question of whether we still want to ship/support the Cloud Base images. For now they are still release-blocking deliverables, but their status feels a little vague to me. It would be good to figure out for sure whether we still consider them important, if so why, and if so who is in charge of them.
I think so. Some effort has been made to consolidate cloud/server, but for right now nothing is broke and people are working on other things so it is the status quo. You can talk to me or Joe Doss about cloud images if you have issues.
Dusty
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Adam Williamson -
Dusty Mabe -
Neal Gompa -
Sayan Chowdhury -
Sinny Kumari