Hi,
I want to avoid adding to the downward spiral I fear this thread is taking, but I feel obligated to object to the suggestion that 'most contributors' don't need to see the raw openQA results.
I never said that "most contributors don't need to see the raw openQA results". Please, re-read. I said that, CURRENTLY, we are NOT ABLE to provide access to raw results, but we are, at least, providing bug reports based on it. I stated that, in my opinion, bug reports are more useful to most contributors than direct access to raw result, just as a side comment.
So, once again, we are not providing direct access to the raw results because there are unresolved security issues on it. And that is the only reason. Is NOT a conscious decision in order to keep people away from the results. Is NOT because we have decided that bug reports are more useful (it was just an unfortunate side note). Is NOT because we think that contributors don't need access to raw results or they are not able to understand them. And is NOT because we want to filter the results in any way.
As Michal pointed, the machine we are currently using to run the development branch of openQA internally is a SUSE development machine, not an openSUSE machine. One of the consequences of the improvements done is that we will be able to run more tests in parallel. We might face hardware limitations that we might need to solve with the current available hardware. In order to create a sustainable service, beside the security issues, there are other issues to be solved like the need of manpower to admin the service and the migration. New features, and a more intensive usage of the tool will require more administration and technical effort, HA, backup, a process to share the tests, technical work in the infrastructure.... all this means involving SUSE sysadmins, the current coordinators, my team... In summary, we have improved the software but improving the service needs additional considerations we haven't made. Until all these considerations are evaluated, there are two basic options, keep using the current service or install your own instance. The goody of this second option is that you will be able to use the new features. We hope this compensate the effort of installing it and maintaining your private instance. For those of you that make heavy use of openqa.opensuse.org could be a solution to evaluate. Obviously if you, like Guido, cannot do it, then openqa.opensuse.org is your only option. And again, if you have a question with the current service, please ping the coordinators.
I don't know. The people behind openqa.opensuse.org (who are not and have never been the openSUSE Team itself) is the right people to ask. But the lack of results in openqa.o.o has nothing to do with the existance of another instance running V2 (in a completely different hardware and managed by absolutely different people).
Ludwig pointed an alternate solution, knowing that openqa.opensuse.org is run under volunteer basis and resources are stressed: if somebody cannot wait for the results of the service, he/she can always run his own instance. It was pointed that this option is not a good one in Guido case.... so no solution can be provided by my team.... for him. I want to finish this long thread (from my side at least): 1.- Thanking those behind openqa.opensuse.org The last few releases it has been a key service. Without it, we wouldn't be able to get the level of stability openSUSE has today. I hope this thread and opinions did not blur this fact. 2.- I consider some of Robert's words disrespectful. Looking at the answers you have received from my team members, it is a shared feeling. Comments like this one: "Why would you purposefully delay/impede the work of contributors that happen to work for someone other than SUSE?" goes way beyond what is reasonable in this public environment, specially among colleagues. I don't accept them. Nobody should. Saludos -- Agustin Benito Bethencourt openSUSE Team Lead at SUSE abebe@suse.com