[Cinder.glusterfs.ci] [Third-party-announce] Four Cisco CI systems are disabled
Wan, Sam
Sam.Wan at emc.com
Tue Mar 8 02:58:02 UTC 2016
Hi,
Our CI's ran into this issue too recently.
I've followed your suggestion to change merge-failure to only send SMTP message.
But could you tell me why this issue happened?
I've upgraded my zuul to latest 2.1.0. Is this OK?
Also someone told me that I might need to clean local zuul cache from time to time, is that correct?
Thanks and regards.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shan Wan (Sam)
e2e Validation Lab (E-LAB) | Engineering Operations, Services & Solutions (EOS2)
w: (86)28.8296.6713 | 8F, C12, Tianfu Software Park, Chengdu, SC. China
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Ball [mailto:bob.ball at citrix.com]
Sent: Monday, March 07, 2016 11:17 PM
To: Announcements for third party CI operators.; Anita Kuno
Subject: Re: [Third-party-announce] Four Cisco CI systems are disabled
Yes Yaroslav.
See https://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/project-config-example/tree/zuul/layout.yaml for the recommended layout for a third party CI.
In this layout, merge-failure only sends an SMTP message and does not vote on the change.
Thanks,
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Yaroslav Morkovnikov (ymorkovn) [mailto:ymorkovn at cisco.com]
Sent: 07 March 2016 08:10
To: Anita Kuno <anteaya at anteaya.info>
Cc: Announcements for third party CI operators. <third-party-announce at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [Third-party-announce] Four Cisco CI systems are disabled
Hi, Anita
Ok got It.
So the problem was on our end with zuul-merger. It brakes our sandbox where mergers are going....All next merges were unsuccessful.
We did not have handler for "merge-failure" event as result a default message was posted So for now it configured as
merge-failure:
gerrit:
verified: -1
Do you think that configuring like
merge-failure:
smtp:
to: third_party_ci at example.com
from: zuul at example.com
subject: .....
Is more correct and zull do not send message again? If so I will do that instead
merge-failure:
gerrit:
verified: -1
Regards
Yaroslav
-----Original Message-----
From: Anita Kuno [mailto:anteaya at anteaya.info]
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 7:34 PM
To: Yaroslav Morkovnikov (ymorkovn)
Cc: Announcements for third party CI operators.
Subject: Re: [Third-party-announce] Four Cisco CI systems are disabled
On 03/04/2016 05:24 AM, Yaroslav Morkovnikov (ymorkovn) wrote:
> Rebase was done. We have disabled sending -1 in case of fails. Could you unlock account. We will see how it's going on our end.
>
> _____________________________________________
> From: Yaroslav Morkovnikov (ymorkovn)
> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 11:31 AM
> To: 'anteaya at anteaya.info'
> Cc: 'Announcements for third party CI operators.'
> Subject: RE: [Third-party-announce] Four Cisco CI systems are disabled
>
>
> Hi, Anita
>
> I have updated wiki regarding UCSm according requirements. As well
> UCSm CI do not post "-1" while bug is not resolved. I think it could
> be unblocked
>
> For other jobs what you mentioned I do not see any issues on my end.
> All of them are configured like ...................
> pipelines:
> - name: check-pnr
> manager: IndependentPipelineManager
> trigger:
> gerrit:
> - event: patchset-created
> - event: change-restored
> - event: comment-added
> comment_filter: (?i)^(Patch Set [0-9]+:\n\n)?\s*recheck\s*$
> - event: comment-added
> comment_filter: (?i)^(Patch Set [0-9]+:\n\n)?\s*recheck cisco-nexus\s*$
> success:
> gerrit:
> verified: 1
> failure:
> gerrit:
> verified: -1
> .....................
>
> It were not changed last 6 month.
> Could you provide more details from your end?
>
> Regards
> Yaroslav
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yaroslav Morkovnikov (ymorkovn)
> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 8:30 AM
> To: 'anteaya at anteaya.info'
> Cc: 'Announcements for third party CI operators.'
> Subject: RE: [Third-party-announce] Four Cisco CI systems are disabled
>
> Hi, Anita
>
> Could you give me some examples regarding issues with Cisco N1kv CI Cisco Tail-f CI Cisco ml2 CI. On our end I that jobs are stable, there are no problems due to infrastructure. Tailf has 0 fails at all last 2 days.
> UCSm is expected. There is a bug with our plug in I'm going to disable posting -1 while bug is not resolved.
>
> Regards
> Yaroslav
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anita Kuno [mailto:anteaya at anteaya.info]
> Sent: Friday, March 04, 2016 4:08 AM
> To: Nikolay Fedotov (nfedotov); Richard Winters (riwinter); ucsm.ci(mailer list); n1kv.ci(mailer list); tailf.ci(mailer list); ml2.ci(mailer list); Announcements for Third Party CI Operators.
> Subject: [Third-party-announce] Four Cisco CI systems are disabled
>
> Cisco UCSM CI
> Cisco N1kv CI
> Cisco Tail-f CI
> Cisco ml2 CI
>
> These four CI systems are currently disabled. All four were posting:
> Merge Failed. This change was unable to be automatically merged with the current state of the repository. Please rebase your change and upload a new patchset.
>
> This message is only useful to developers if it comes from Infra's Jenkins. It has less than no value if it comes from Third Party CI systems. It may in some cases confuse new developers that may think this message from a third party ci system requires any action on their part.
>
> Ensure your systems do not post this message to gerrit patches please.
> Post a reply to this email on the third-party-announce mailing list when you are sure your systems can comply and they will be re-enabled.
>
> Also the UCSM CI system is not listed on the third party systems
> wikipage: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ThirdPartySystems Please add it.
>
> Thank you,
> Anita.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Third-party-announce mailing list
> Third-party-announce at lists.openstack.org<mailto:Third-party-announce at l
> ists.openstack.org>
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/third-party-announ
> ce Please attend the third party meetings:
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Third_Party_Meeting
>
>
Hi Yaroslav:
I think that the point of my initial email was mis-understood.
The reason the accounts were disabled was because they were all posting a mis-leading message to the patches. This had nothing to do with failure behaviour.
Your systems were posting merge failed to patches. This comment is distracting noise coming from third party ci systems.
I posted examples in a follow up to my original post:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/third-party-announce/2016-March/000289.html
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/287611/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/287263/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/287241/
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/275427/
My apologies for not posting them in the original post.
Ramy has posted the solution for the issue here:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/third-party-announce/2016-March/000290.html
Thank you,
Anita.
_______________________________________________
Third-party-announce mailing list
Third-party-announce at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/third-party-announce
Please attend the third party meetings: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Third_Party_Meeting
_______________________________________________
Third-party-announce mailing list
Third-party-announce at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/third-party-announce
Please attend the third party meetings: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Third_Party_Meeting
_______________________________________________
Third-party-announce mailing list
Third-party-announce at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/third-party-announce
Please attend the third party meetings: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/#Third_Party_Meeting
More information about the Cinder.glusterfs.ci
mailing list