Re: [rdo-list] Multiple tools for deploying and testing TripleO

Hi, I would like to start a discussion on the overlap between tools we have for deploying and testing TripleO (RDO & RHOSP) in CI. Several months ago, we worked on one common framework for deploying and testing OpenStack (RDO & RHOSP) in CI. I think you can say it didn't work out well, which eventually led each group to focus on developing other existing/new tools. What we have right now for deploying and testing -------------------------------------------------------- === Component CI, Gating === I'll start with the projects we created, I think that's only fair :) * Ansible-OVB[1] - Provisioning Tripleo heat stack, using the OVB project. * Ansible-RHOSP[2] - Product installation (RHOSP). Branch per release. * Octario[3] - Testing using RPMs (pep8, unit, functional, tempest, csit) + Patching RPMs with submitted code. === Automation, QE === * InfraRed[4] - provision install and test. Pluggable and modular, allows you to create your own provisioner, installer and tester. As far as I know, the groups is working now on different structure of one main project and three sub projects (provision, install and test). === RDO === I didn't use RDO tools, so I apologize if I got something wrong: * About ~25 micro independent Ansible roles[5]. You can either choose to use one of them or several together. They are used for provisioning, installing and testing Tripleo. * Tripleo-quickstart[6] - uses the micro roles for deploying tripleo and test it. As I said, I didn't use the tools, so feel free to add more information you think is relevant. === More? === I hope not. Let us know if are familiar with more tools.

Conclusion -------------- So as you can see, there are several projects that eventually overlap in many areas. Each group is basically using the same tasks (provision resources, build/import overcloud images, run tempest, collect logs, etc.) Personally, I think it's a waste of resources. For each task there is at least two people from different groups who work on exactly the same task. The most recent example I can give is OVB. As far as I know, both groups are working on implementing it in their set of tools right now. On the other hand, you can always claim: "we already tried to work on the same framework, we failed to do it successfully" - right, but maybe with better ground rules we can manage it. We would defiantly benefit a lot from doing that. What's next? ---------------- So first of all, I would like to hear from you if you think that we can collaborate once again or is it actually better to keep it as it is now. If you agree that collaboration here makes sense, maybe you have ideas on how we can do it better this time. I think that setting up a meeting to discuss the right architecture for the project(s) and decide on good review/gating process, would be a good start. Please let me know what do you think and keep in mind that this is not about which tool is better!. As you can see I didn't mention the time it takes for each tool to deploy and test, and also not the full feature list it supports. If possible, we should keep it about collaborating and not choosing the best tool. Our solution could be the combination of two or more tools eventually (tripleo-red, infra-quickstart? :D ) "You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one. I hope some day you'll join us and the infra will be as one" :) [1] https://github.com/redhat-openstack/ansible-ovb [2] https://github.com/redhat-openstack/ansible-rhosp [3] https://github.com/redhat-openstack/octario [4] https://github.com/rhosqeauto/InfraRed [5] https://github.com/redhat-openstack?utf8=%E2%9C%93&query=ansible-role [6] https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-quickstart _______________________________________________ rdo-list mailing list rdo-list(a)redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rdo-list To unsubscribe: rdo-list-unsubscribe(a)redhat.com