[opensuse-factory] openQA

newer
[opensuse-factory] UPower update...

older
[opensuse-factory] RC 13.1 nfs,...

Guido Berhoerster

11 Oct 2013 11 Oct '13

06:52

Hi, why haven't there been any openQA runs on Factory and 13.1? At Beta/RC time it is more important than ever and there are e.g. problems net-installing the Xfce desktop post-Beta1 where openQA would really be helpful. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Show replies by date

Ludwig Nussel

11 Oct 11 Oct

07:33

Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

why haven't there been any openQA runs on Factory and 13.1? At Beta/RC time it is more important than ever and there are e.g. problems net-installing the Xfce desktop post-Beta1 where openQA would really be helpful.

In spring the openSUSE team made a sprint to enhance openQA to make it even more useful for release testing. We mostly succeeded¹²³. Unfortunately we ran out of time to implement proper user managment. Since this new version allows interactive editing and rescheduling of tests in the web interface that is pretty much mandatory to run openQA in public though. So at the moment we have to run our release tests on a private instance unfortunately. That is a pity of course as we could really use more hands to evaluate and fix the test results. So we hope to be able to address this in the future. Meanwhile contributions are welcome nevertheless of course. Running your own instance should be rather easy if you have a sufficiently powerful machine. There's a tutorial in os-autoinst how to install openQA from packages[4]. cu Ludwig [1] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/openQA, [2] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst [3] https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/devel%3AopenQA [4] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst/blob/master/doc/tutorial.pdf -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Richard Brown

12:29

On 11 October 2013 08:33, Ludwig Nussel wrote:

...

Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
why haven't there been any openQA runs on Factory and 13.1? At Beta/RC time it is more important than ever and there are e.g. problems net-installing the Xfce desktop post-Beta1 where openQA would really be helpful.

In spring the openSUSE team made a sprint to enhance openQA to make it even more useful for release testing. We mostly succeeded¹²³. Unfortunately we ran out of time to implement proper user managment. Since this new version allows interactive editing and rescheduling of tests in the web interface that is pretty much mandatory to run openQA in public though. So at the moment we have to run our release tests on a private instance unfortunately. That is a pity of course as we could really use more hands to evaluate and fix the test results. So we hope to be able to address this in the future.

Meanwhile contributions are welcome nevertheless of course. Running your own instance should be rather easy if you have a sufficiently powerful machine. There's a tutorial in os-autoinst how to install openQA from packages[4].

cu Ludwig

[1] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/openQA, [2] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst [3] https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/devel%3AopenQA [4] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst/blob/master/doc/tutorial.pdf

hmm, that is dreadfully disappointing I consider openQA an important community service, and it's sad to think that it's no longer available to the community. As a regular tester of openSUSE, I find it invaluable to have a reference to compare a lot of my own tests against. If I no longer have that, my ability to test openSUSE is going to be hindered. I appreciate the effort the openSUSE Team made to improve openQA, but if the situation really is that the community cant use openQA at all now unless they install it themselves, then I'm really not sure we can call the current situation an 'improvement' Given I cant see how the new openQA works, forgive me if this is a stupid suggestion, but surely a public view of the results from openQA wouldn't need any editing, rescheduling or user management.. can we have that added/restored to openQA and have the openSUSE openQA instance restored as a community service as soon as possible? Regards Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Roman Bysh

12:55

On 10/11/2013 08:29 AM, Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 11 October 2013 08:33, Ludwig Nussel wrote:

...
Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
why haven't there been any openQA runs on Factory and 13.1? At Beta/RC time it is more important than ever and there are e.g. problems net-installing the Xfce desktop post-Beta1 where openQA would really be helpful.

In spring the openSUSE team made a sprint to enhance openQA to make it even more useful for release testing. We mostly succeeded¹²³. Unfortunately we ran out of time to implement proper user managment. Since this new version allows interactive editing and rescheduling of tests in the web interface that is pretty much mandatory to run openQA in public though. So at the moment we have to run our release tests on a private instance unfortunately. That is a pity of course as we could really use more hands to evaluate and fix the test results. So we hope to be able to address this in the future.

Meanwhile contributions are welcome nevertheless of course. Running your own instance should be rather easy if you have a sufficiently powerful machine. There's a tutorial in os-autoinst how to install openQA from packages[4].

cu Ludwig

[1] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/openQA, [2] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst [3] https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/devel%3AopenQA [4] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst/blob/master/doc/tutorial.pdf

hmm, that is dreadfully disappointing

I consider openQA an important community service, and it's sad to think that it's no longer available to the community. As a regular tester of openSUSE, I find it invaluable to have a reference to compare a lot of my own tests against. If I no longer have that, my ability to test openSUSE is going to be hindered.

I appreciate the effort the openSUSE Team made to improve openQA, but if the situation really is that the community cant use openQA at all now unless they install it themselves, then I'm really not sure we can call the current situation an 'improvement'

Given I cant see how the new openQA works, forgive me if this is a stupid suggestion, but surely a public view of the results from openQA wouldn't need any editing, rescheduling or user management.. can we have that added/restored to openQA and have the openSUSE openQA instance restored as a community service as soon as possible?

Regards

Richard

Not very transparent for the openSUSE user that does a lot of testing. I very much appreciate seeing what openQA does not to mention the ideas it may give us for future improvement. -- Cheers! Roman ------------------------------------------- openSUSE -- Get it! Discover it! Share it! ------------------------------------------- http://linuxcounter.net/ #179293 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ludwig Nussel

13:35

Richard Brown wrote:

...

Given I cant see how the new openQA works, forgive me if this is a stupid suggestion, but surely a public view of the results from openQA wouldn't need any editing, rescheduling or user management.. can we have that added/restored to openQA and have the openSUSE openQA instance restored as a community service as soon as possible?

I'm sure it wouldn't be rocket science. We can rsync the test results anywhere. Voluteers to implement the read only view are welcome of course. Right now getting 13.1 done has priority though. cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.de/ SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Guido Berhoerster

13:46

* Ludwig Nussel [2013-10-11 15:35]:

...

Richard Brown wrote:

...
Given I cant see how the new openQA works, forgive me if this is a stupid suggestion, but surely a public view of the results from openQA wouldn't need any editing, rescheduling or user management.. can we have that added/restored to openQA and have the openSUSE openQA instance restored as a community service as soon as possible?

I'm sure it wouldn't be rocket science. We can rsync the test results anywhere. Voluteers to implement the read only view are welcome of course. Right now getting 13.1 done has priority though.

The unavailability of openQA actually affects getting 13.1 done, I would have caught at least one bug a lot earlier if it had not stopped running. and due to crappy connectivity on my end I can't do constant fresh installs. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Alberto Planas

13:56

On Friday, October 11, 2013 01:29:52 PM Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 11 October 2013 08:33, Ludwig Nussel wrote:

...
Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
why haven't there been any openQA runs on Factory and 13.1? At Beta/RC time it is more important than ever and there are e.g. problems net-installing the Xfce desktop post-Beta1 where openQA would really be helpful.

In spring the openSUSE team made a sprint to enhance openQA to make it even more useful for release testing. We mostly succeeded¹²³. Unfortunately we ran out of time to implement proper user managment. Since this new version allows interactive editing and rescheduling of tests in the web interface that is pretty much mandatory to run openQA in public though. So at the moment we have to run our release tests on a private instance unfortunately. That is a pity of course as we could really use more hands to evaluate and fix the test results. So we hope to be able to address this in the future.

Meanwhile contributions are welcome nevertheless of course. Running your own instance should be rather easy if you have a sufficiently powerful machine. There's a tutorial in os-autoinst how to install openQA from packages[4].

cu Ludwig

[1] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/openQA, [2] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst [3] https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/devel%3AopenQA [4] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst/blob/master/doc/tutorial.pdf

hmm, that is dreadfully disappointing

I consider openQA an important community service, and it's sad to think that it's no longer available to the community. As a regular tester of openSUSE, I find it invaluable to have a reference to compare a lot of my own tests against. If I no longer have that, my ability to test openSUSE is going to be hindered.

This is really good to know.

...

I appreciate the effort the openSUSE Team made to improve openQA, but if the situation really is that the community cant use openQA at all now unless they install it themselves, then I'm really not sure we can call the current situation an 'improvement'

I know that there are efforts that try to deploy openQA V2 in http://openqa.opensuse.org.

...

Given I cant see how the new openQA works, forgive me if this is a stupid suggestion, but surely a public view of the results from openQA wouldn't need any editing, rescheduling or user management.. can we have that added/restored to openQA and have the openSUSE openQA instance restored as a community service as soon as possible?

This idea is also very cool, and not very difficult to implement. As Ludwig said, the team is now working on RC1 (done) and RC2 (todo), so our priority is in another direction now. But openQA V2 source code is completely avaliable using the links provided by Ludwig, so is possible to check good strategies to publish the results in a easy way. Maybe Varnish with some post-script to patch some URLs?

...

Regards

Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

agustin benito bethencourt

14 Oct 14 Oct

08:45

Hi, On Friday 11 October 2013 13:29:52 Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 11 October 2013 08:33, Ludwig Nussel wrote:

...
Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
why haven't there been any openQA runs on Factory and 13.1? At Beta/RC time it is more important than ever and there are e.g. problems net-installing the Xfce desktop post-Beta1 where openQA would really be helpful.

In spring the openSUSE team made a sprint to enhance openQA to make it even more useful for release testing. We mostly succeeded¹²³. Unfortunately we ran out of time to implement proper user managment. Since this new version allows interactive editing and rescheduling of tests in the web interface that is pretty much mandatory to run openQA in public though. So at the moment we have to run our release tests on a private instance unfortunately. That is a pity of course as we could really use more hands to evaluate and fix the test results. So we hope to be able to address this in the future.

Meanwhile contributions are welcome nevertheless of course. Running your own instance should be rather easy if you have a sufficiently powerful machine. There's a tutorial in os-autoinst how to install openQA from packages[4].

cu Ludwig

[1] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/openQA, [2] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst [3] https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/devel%3AopenQA [4] https://github.com/openSUSE-Team/os-autoinst/blob/master/doc/tutorial.pdf

hmm, that is dreadfully disappointing

I consider openQA an important community service, and it's sad to think that it's no longer available to the community. As a regular tester of openSUSE, I find it invaluable to have a reference to compare a lot of my own tests against. If I no longer have that, my ability to test openSUSE is going to be hindered.

I appreciate the effort the openSUSE Team made to improve openQA, but if the situation really is that the community cant use openQA at all now unless they install it themselves, then I'm really not sure we can call the current situation an 'improvement'

The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way. We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service. We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though. Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the distro and the improvements done.

...

Given I cant see how the new openQA works, forgive me if this is a stupid suggestion, but surely a public view of the results from openQA wouldn't need any editing, rescheduling or user management.. can we have that added/restored to openQA and have the openSUSE openQA instance restored as a community service as soon as possible?

If we talk about the development, we have worked in the open, as expected. If you talk about the service, we do not intend to provide an alternative service of openQA for openSUSE. That makes no sense from our point of view and it would be unfair with upstream. So answering your request, we have nothing to restore. We are waiting for upstream to migrate the open service to the following version so we all can use it in the open. Obviously we will help in this task when required. openqa.opensuse.org is a great service and, as some of you mentioned, has an increasing impact in our development process. I invite you to collaborate with Bernhard on it. We will also help when we can. These days we are focused in other tasks and we cannot, but we expect to have a time window to put effort on it during the first half of next year. Saludos -- Agustin Benito Bethencourt openSUSE Team Lead at SUSE abebe@suse.com

Guido Berhoerster

09:10

* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...

The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though. Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the distro and the improvements done.

So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege? I maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources (i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own. Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who have a need for it access to the new instance? -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

agustin benito bethencourt

09:44

Hi Guido, On Monday 14 October 2013 11:10:45 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...
The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though. Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the distro and the improvements done. So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?

Priviledge? Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so. Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

...

I maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources (i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own. Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so I have no info about why your workflow has changed. Maybe Bernhard is more qualified to provide you with a proper answer about this. Please ping him. Saludos -- Agustin Benito Bethencourt openSUSE Team Lead at SUSE abebe@suse.com

Guido Berhoerster

14:39

* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 11:45]:

...

Hi Guido,

On Monday 14 October 2013 11:10:45 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...
The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though. Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the distro and the improvements done. So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?

Priviledge?

Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so. Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

No, as I wrote below I don't have the resources to run my own instance and relied on openqa.opensuse.org.

...

...
I maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources (i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own. Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so I have no info about why your workflow has changed. Maybe Bernhard is more qualified to provide you with a proper answer about this. Please ping him.

See the initial mail that started this thread, there have been no more runs of recent Factory/13.1 on openqa.opensuse.org for about two weeks or so and at this point in time it would be very helpful to catch regresssions (such as e.g. bnc#845264) as early as possible. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

agustin benito bethencourt

15:44

Hi Guido,

...

...
Priviledge?

Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so. Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

No, as I wrote below I don't have the resources to run my own instance and relied on openqa.opensuse.org.

As pointed, then you will have to wait until the coordinators of the service provide a solution, which I think they already did[1]. We cannot provide any other solution for this Release. [1] http://openqa.opensuse.org/results/ Saludos -- Agustin Benito Bethencourt openSUSE Team Lead at SUSE abebe@suse.com

Robert Schweikert

15:01

Hi, Sorry for budding in, but..... On 10/14/2013 05:44 AM, agustin benito bethencourt wrote:

...

Hi Guido,

On Monday 14 October 2013 11:10:45 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...
...
The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run

...
...
under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

...
...
...
...
We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with

...
...
upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements

...
...
should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

...
...
...
...
We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to

...
...
make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though.

...
...
Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the

...
...
distro and the improvements done.

...
So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?

Priviledge?

Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so.

I am not certain what part of "I don't have the resources..." in Guido's response is difficult to understand. However, given that it is apparently hard to comprehend that someone cannot run openQA on their own let me ask some questions rather than making statements. Given the fact that at present we produce two different sets of results, the openQA results at openqa.opensuse.org and the forked instance operated by the openSUSE team, how do we expect a consistent view of the world for all contributors? The fork of openQA is running on non community accessible hardware and thus maintainers of packages/sub-systems cannot see the results of the tests run by the forked code. It should be reasonably obvious that this is not a good situation. How can a maintainer of anything be expected to help fix an issue he/she is not aware of? How can a contributor be aware of a problem when it is only displayed on results pages he/she cannot see? Why is it so hard to mirror the results from the private instance of the openQA fork to a place where factory contributors can see the results? All of this with the understanding that if the code that powers the fork of openQA the openSUSE team is running is integrated upstream the secondary results page becomes unnecessary and goes away.

...

Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

Why would you purposefully delay/impede the work of contributors that happen to work for someone other than SUSE? If you already have the results and are aware of problems why can you not just share the results? Why would you make the community wait for upstream inclusion of the forked code when you apparently already have results that may be useful but are not yet available upstream, for whatever reason.

...

...
I

...
maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very

...
important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of

...
tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources

...
(i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own.

...
Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a

...
public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who

...
have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so

No one has asked you to fiddle with openqa.opensuse.org. Although closer collaboration with upstream may be a better use of everyone's time, those are decisions you have to make for your team. What is being asked is that you publish the results from your fork of openQA. This does not appear to be an unreasonable request, nor is it unfair to upstream. Forking, public discussion, results publishing happen all the time in the FOSS community and we can all deal with it. What is not supposed to happen is that some think they are more special than others and willfully make the work of others more difficult. Please publish the results from your fork of openQA in an effort to make things easier for everyone instead of just the few privileged. My $0.02 Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX Tech Lead Public Cloud Architect rjschwei@suse.com rschweik@ca.ibm.com 781-464-8147 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Michal Hrusecky

15:29

Robert Schweikert - 11:01 14.10.13 wrote:

...

Hi,

Sorry for budding in, but.....

On 10/14/2013 05:44 AM, agustin benito bethencourt wrote:

...
Hi Guido,

On Monday 14 October 2013 11:10:45 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...
...
The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run

...
...
under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

...
...
...
...
We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with

...
...
upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements

...
...
should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

...
...
...
...
We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to

...
...
make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though.

...
...
Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the

...
...
distro and the improvements done.

...
So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?

Priviledge?

Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so.

I am not certain what part of "I don't have the resources..." in Guido's response is difficult to understand. However, given that it is apparently hard to comprehend that someone cannot run openQA on their own let me ask some questions rather than making statements.

Given the fact that at present we produce two different sets of results, the openQA results at openqa.opensuse.org and the forked instance operated by the openSUSE team, how do we expect a consistent view of the world for all contributors?

hmmm, consistent view of the world, that sounds difficult, there are all these politics, religion and stuff... :-)

...

The fork of openQA is running on non community accessible hardware and thus maintainers of packages/sub-systems cannot see the results of the tests run by the forked code. It should be reasonably obvious that this is not a good situation. How can a maintainer of anything be expected to help fix an issue he/she is not aware of?

As it is obviously not a good decision to promote and make publicly accessible development machine.

...

How can a contributor be aware of a problem when it is only displayed on results pages he/she cannot see?

As once we verify the problems, we report them via bugzilla which is THE bug reporting tool ;-)

...

Why is it so hard to mirror the results from the private instance of the openQA fork to a place where factory contributors can see the results?

My guess, lot of data, would need somebody to do it and would need hosting and it's temporally workaround around inclusion in upstream, which is correct solution ;-) Overall, I would say not worth it, but not my decision.

...

All of this with the understanding that if the code that powers the fork of openQA the openSUSE team is running is integrated upstream the secondary results page becomes unnecessary and goes away.

...
Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

Why would you purposefully delay/impede the work of contributors that happen to work for someone other than SUSE?

We don't :-)

...

If you already have the results and are aware of problems why can you not just share the results?

We do, via bugzilla.

...

Why would you make the community wait for upstream inclusion of the forked code when you apparently already have results that may be useful but are not yet available upstream, for whatever reason.

We don't.

...

...
...
I

...
maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very

...
important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of

...
tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources

...
(i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own.

...
Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a

...
public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who

...
have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so

No one has asked you to fiddle with openqa.opensuse.org. Although closer collaboration with upstream may be a better use of everyone's time, those are decisions you have to make for your team. What is being asked is that you publish the results from your fork of openQA. This does not appear to be an unreasonable request, nor is it unfair to upstream.

Forking, public discussion, results publishing happen all the time in the FOSS community and we can all deal with it. What is not supposed to happen is that some think they are more special than others and willfully make the work of others more difficult.

Which we don't do.

...

Please publish the results from your fork of openQA in an effort to make things easier for everyone instead of just the few privileged.

-- Michal HRUSECKY SUSE LINUX, s.r.o openSUSE Team Lihovarska 1060/12 PGP 0xFED656F6 19000 Praha 9 mhrusecky[at]suse.cz Czech Republic http://michal.hrusecky.net http://www.suse.cz -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ancor Gonzalez Sosa

17:11

On 10/14/2013 05:01 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:

...

Hi,

Sorry for budding in, but.....

On 10/14/2013 05:44 AM, agustin benito bethencourt wrote:

...
Hi Guido,

On Monday 14 October 2013 11:10:45 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...
...
The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run

...
...
under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

...
...
...
...
We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with

...
...
upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements

...
...
should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

...
...
...
...
We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to

...
...
make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though.

...
...
Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the

...
...
distro and the improvements done.

...
So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?

Priviledge?

Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so.

I am not certain what part of "I don't have the resources..." in Guido's response is difficult to understand. However, given that it is apparently hard to comprehend that someone cannot run openQA on their own let me ask some questions rather than making statements.

Given the fact that at present we produce two different sets of results, the openQA results at openqa.opensuse.org and the forked instance operated by the openSUSE team, how do we expect a consistent view of the world for all contributors?

The fork of openQA is running on non community accessible hardware and thus maintainers of packages/sub-systems cannot see the results of the tests run by the forked code. It should be reasonably obvious that this is not a good situation. How can a maintainer of anything be expected to help fix an issue he/she is not aware of?

How can a contributor be aware of a problem when it is only displayed on results pages he/she cannot see?

The openSUSE Team is reporting bugs in bugzilla after diagnosing the problem behind every "red" test in that instance of openQA. Which is probably way more useful for most contributors than having access to the raw openQA results.

...

Why is it so hard to mirror the results from the private instance of the openQA fork to a place where factory contributors can see the results?

All of this with the understanding that if the code that powers the fork of openQA the openSUSE team is running is integrated upstream the secondary results page becomes unnecessary and goes away.

The problem is not a lack of integration of the code with "upstream" (which means Bernhard M. Wiedemann and Dominik Heidler). The openSUSE Team have collaborated closely with upstream during the process. You can check for Bernhard and Dominik commits in the repositories of openSUSE V2. Right now, V1 will not be further developed, since V2 has all the blessing from upstream. Right now, it's not a fork. It's the next version. But one of the strengths of V2 is also one of its weakness: a more powerful web interface that allows not only to read the results but also to enter a test into interactive mode, to re-schedule or rerun tests, etc. And right now, there is no access control for these actions. For that reason, openqa.opensuse.org is not running V2 right now. The responsible of the service (Bernhard) is looking for proper solutions and the openSUSE Team is trying to help him. Any other help is welcome.

...

...
Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

Why would you purposefully delay/impede the work of contributors that happen to work for someone other than SUSE?

We are not doing such a thing. We are not removing any tool or service. We are providing a new tool. We are using that tool with our own resources to create bug reports. Is everything about enabling the work of contributors.

...

If you already have the results and are aware of problems why can you not just share the results?

It's already explained. Technical issues. Bernhard and the openSUSE Team are working on it it. Help and constructive comments are welcome.

...

Why would you make the community wait for upstream inclusion of the forked code when you apparently already have results that may be useful but are not yet available upstream, for whatever reason.

Once again. I hope is already answered.

...

...
...
maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very

...
important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of

...
tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources

...
(i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own.

...
Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a

...
public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who

...
have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so

No one has asked you to fiddle with openqa.opensuse.org. Although closer collaboration with upstream may be a better use of everyone's time, those are decisions you have to make for your team. What is being asked is that you publish the results from your fork of openQA. This does not appear to be an unreasonable request, nor is it unfair to upstream.

Forking, public discussion, results publishing happen all the time in the FOSS community and we can all deal with it. What is not supposed to happen is that some think they are more special than others and willfully make the work of others more difficult.

Once again. We have helped to improve a tool and while the new version is available in public resources, we are using our own resources to run that tool and provide bug reports. Does it means that we consider ourselves to be "more special than other"? We are not drawing that difference (considering us to be "more special"). You are doing it. If some community member not affiliated to SUSE decides to set up its own instance of openQA to test whatever he wants to test and he/she does not provide public access to his/her machine and results... Would you say that he/she is doing things wrong? Would you say that he/she is trying to feel "more special" or "privileged"? Would you blame him/her for willfully making the work of others more difficult? I don't think so. So please, stop considering us to be "special". We don't do it.

...

Please publish the results from your fork of openQA in an effort to make things easier for everyone instead of just the few privileged.

My $0.02 Robert

Cheers. -- Ancor González Sosa openSUSE Team at SUSE Linux GmbH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Guido Berhoerster

17:49

* Ancor Gonzalez Sosa [2013-10-14 19:11]:

...

On 10/14/2013 05:01 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:

...
I am not certain what part of "I don't have the resources..." in Guido's response is difficult to understand. However, given that it is apparently hard to comprehend that someone cannot run openQA on their own let me ask some questions rather than making statements.

Given the fact that at present we produce two different sets of results, the openQA results at openqa.opensuse.org and the forked instance operated by the openSUSE team, how do we expect a consistent view of the world for all contributors?

The fork of openQA is running on non community accessible hardware and thus maintainers of packages/sub-systems cannot see the results of the tests run by the forked code. It should be reasonably obvious that this is not a good situation. How can a maintainer of anything be expected to help fix an issue he/she is not aware of?

How can a contributor be aware of a problem when it is only displayed on results pages he/she cannot see?

The openSUSE Team is reporting bugs in bugzilla after diagnosing the problem behind every "red" test in that instance of openQA. Which is probably way more useful for most contributors than having access to the raw openQA results.

Sorry, but this is nonsense. Some of these tests do not have binary results (e.g. my list of GNOME packages on a Xfce default install) and there are also often false positives. A filter in form of the openSUSE Team is not helpful here, I need raw access, I know what I'm doing and I've written part of the Xfce tests myself.

...

...
Why is it so hard to mirror the results from the private instance of the openQA fork to a place where factory contributors can see the results?

All of this with the understanding that if the code that powers the fork of openQA the openSUSE team is running is integrated upstream the secondary results page becomes unnecessary and goes away.

The problem is not a lack of integration of the code with "upstream" (which means Bernhard M. Wiedemann and Dominik Heidler). The openSUSE Team have collaborated closely with upstream during the process. You can check for Bernhard and Dominik commits in the repositories of openSUSE V2. Right now, V1 will not be further developed, since V2 has all the blessing from upstream. Right now, it's not a fork. It's the next version.

But one of the strengths of V2 is also one of its weakness: a more powerful web interface that allows not only to read the results but also to enter a test into interactive mode, to re-schedule or rerun tests, etc. And right now, there is no access control for these actions. For that reason, openqa.opensuse.org is not running V2 right now. The responsible of the service (Bernhard) is looking for proper solutions and the openSUSE Team is trying to help him. Any other help is welcome.

I appreciate improvements but if the next version is not ready why don't you continue running openqa.opensuse.org which works and is highly useful? And if you're not willing to do that why is it so hard to mirror the results page to a public webserver as has been suggested several times?

...

...
...
Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

Why would you purposefully delay/impede the work of contributors that happen to work for someone other than SUSE?

We are not doing such a thing. We are not removing any tool or service. We are providing a new tool. We are using that tool with our own resources to create bug reports. Is everything about enabling the work of contributors.

But you have, as I understand it openqa.opensuse.org is not operated any more while the replacement is months away. And this happened between Beta1 and RC1 when the ability to catch regressions (like the recent X11 pattern changes) is crucial.

...

...
If you already have the results and are aware of problems why can you not just share the results?

It's already explained. Technical issues. Bernhard and the openSUSE Team are working on it it. Help and constructive comments are welcome.

...
Why would you make the community wait for upstream inclusion of the forked code when you apparently already have results that may be useful but are not yet available upstream, for whatever reason.

Once again. I hope is already answered.

...
...
...
maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very

...
important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of

...
tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources

...
(i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own.

...
Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a

...
public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who

...
have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so

No one has asked you to fiddle with openqa.opensuse.org. Although closer collaboration with upstream may be a better use of everyone's time, those are decisions you have to make for your team. What is being asked is that you publish the results from your fork of openQA. This does not appear to be an unreasonable request, nor is it unfair to upstream.

Forking, public discussion, results publishing happen all the time in the FOSS community and we can all deal with it. What is not supposed to happen is that some think they are more special than others and willfully make the work of others more difficult.

Once again. We have helped to improve a tool and while the new version is available in public resources, we are using our own resources to run that tool and provide bug reports. Does it means that we consider ourselves to be "more special than other"? We are not drawing that difference (considering us to be "more special"). You are doing it. If some community member not affiliated to SUSE decides to set up its own instance of openQA to test whatever he wants to test and he/she does not provide public access to his/her machine and results... Would you say that he/she is doing things wrong? Would you say that he/she is trying to feel "more special" or "privileged"? Would you blame him/her for willfully making the work of others more difficult? I don't think so. So please, stop considering us to be "special". We don't do it.

See above, I neither want nor need a filter nor is it any useful to me, rather I need to do more testing work manually during RC time. And this sucks. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Joachim Schrod

18:39

New subject: [opensuse-factory] Re: openQA

On 10/14/13 19:49, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

I appreciate improvements but if the next version is not ready why don't you continue running openqa.opensuse.org which works and is highly useful?

Hmm, the OpenSUSE Team @ SUSE pointed out several times that they don't run openqa now and didn't run it in the past. They worked on software development, but are not involved in that service. What do you mean with "continue running openqa"? Since you use "run" you are writing about the service and not about the software. Where does the verb "continue" fit in with their description of their work? Don't you realize that you're barking up the wrong tree? Joachim [not affiliated with SUSE in any way] -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Joachim Schrod, Roedermark, Germany Email: jschrod@acm.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Robert Schweikert

18:42

Hi, OK, I'll bite. On 10/14/2013 01:11 PM, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:

...

On 10/14/2013 05:01 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:

...
Hi,

Sorry for budding in, but.....

On 10/14/2013 05:44 AM, agustin benito bethencourt wrote:

...
Hi Guido,

On Monday 14 October 2013 11:10:45 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...
...
The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run

...
...
under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

...
...
...
...
We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with

...
...
upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements

...
...
should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

...
...
...
...
We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to

...
...
make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though.

...
...
Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the

...
...
distro and the improvements done.

...
So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?

Priviledge?

Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so.

I am not certain what part of "I don't have the resources..." in Guido's response is difficult to understand. However, given that it is apparently hard to comprehend that someone cannot run openQA on their own let me ask some questions rather than making statements.

Given the fact that at present we produce two different sets of results, the openQA results at openqa.opensuse.org and the forked instance operated by the openSUSE team, how do we expect a consistent view of the world for all contributors?

The fork of openQA is running on non community accessible hardware and thus maintainers of packages/sub-systems cannot see the results of the tests run by the forked code. It should be reasonably obvious that this is not a good situation. How can a maintainer of anything be expected to help fix an issue he/she is not aware of?

How can a contributor be aware of a problem when it is only displayed on results pages he/she cannot see?

The openSUSE Team is reporting bugs in bugzilla after diagnosing the problem behind every "red" test in that instance of openQA. Which is probably way more useful for most contributors than having access to the raw openQA results.

Well, if we would follow that logic we shouldn't be publishing the raw openQA results as it is today either. Rather we'd have someone "qualified" to interpret the results and file bugs all the time. Yes, I am being a bit fastidious, but you make it sound as if contributors are not qualified to draw their own conclusions. Unless of course the raw results from v2 of openQA have changed dramatically such that contributors cannot understand them. In that case we have another problem.

...

...
Why is it so hard to mirror the results from the private instance of the openQA fork to a place where factory contributors can see the results?

All of this with the understanding that if the code that powers the fork of openQA the openSUSE team is running is integrated upstream the secondary results page becomes unnecessary and goes away.

The problem is not a lack of integration of the code with "upstream" (which means Bernhard M. Wiedemann and Dominik Heidler). The openSUSE Team have collaborated closely with upstream during the process. You can check for Bernhard and Dominik commits in the repositories of openSUSE V2. Right now, V1 will not be further developed, since V2 has all the blessing from upstream. Right now, it's not a fork. It's the next version.

But one of the strengths of V2 is also one of its weakness: a more powerful web interface that allows not only to read the results but also to enter a test into interactive mode, to re-schedule or rerun tests, etc. And right now, there is no access control for these actions. For that reason, openqa.opensuse.org is not running V2 right now. The responsible of the service (Bernhard) is looking for proper solutions and the openSUSE Team is trying to help him. Any other help is welcome.

Well even better, that should make it even easier to just publish the results you generate with the understanding that once the authentication issues are resolved the secondary results go away and everything shows back up at openqa.opensuse.org

...

...
...
Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

Why would you purposefully delay/impede the work of contributors that happen to work for someone other than SUSE?

We are not doing such a thing. We are not removing any tool or service. We are providing a new tool. We are using that tool with our own resources to create bug reports. Is everything about enabling the work of contributors.

I am sorry, but somehow I get the feeling the point is being missed here. Let me try this another way. There was a relatively simple request in Guido's reply, I will paraphrase. "Publish the results from the openQA instance the openSUSE team is running" The answer to that request was, again paraphrasing, "no, go run your own instance if you want results from openQA v2". In my book this is denying a reasonable request and by extension impeding contributors with non @suse.com domain. It is really quite that simple. Of course there is always the chance that my reading of the thread is off the wall, thus I can only encourage others to jump in.

...

...
If you already have the results and are aware of problems why can you not just share the results?

It's already explained. Technical issues. Bernhard and the openSUSE Team are working on it it. Help and constructive comments are welcome.

...
Why would you make the community wait for upstream inclusion of the forked code when you apparently already have results that may be useful but are not yet available upstream, for whatever reason.

Once again. I hope is already answered.

...
...
...
maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very

...
important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of

...
tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources

...
(i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own.

...
Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a

...
public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who

...
have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so

No one has asked you to fiddle with openqa.opensuse.org. Although closer collaboration with upstream may be a better use of everyone's time, those are decisions you have to make for your team. What is being asked is that you publish the results from your fork of openQA. This does not appear to be an unreasonable request, nor is it unfair to upstream.

Forking, public discussion, results publishing happen all the time in the FOSS community and we can all deal with it. What is not supposed to happen is that some think they are more special than others and willfully make the work of others more difficult.

Once again. We have helped to improve a tool

Yes, and the effort was recognized and well received as far as I can tell.

...

and while the new version is available in public resources, we are using our own resources to run that tool and provide bug reports.

Great thanks.

...

Does it means that we consider ourselves to be "more special than other"? We are not drawing that difference (considering us to be "more special"). You are doing it. If some community member not affiliated to SUSE decides to set up its own instance of openQA to test whatever he wants to test and he/she does not provide public access to his/her machine and results... Would you say that he/she is doing things wrong? Would you say that he/she is trying to feel "more special" or "privileged"? Would you blame him/her for willfully making the work of others more difficult?

If it is presented in the same way you are going about it the answer is a simple yes. Of course I very much doubt that within the community we have someone or any other group of people that would deny a request to publish a set results somewhere. There is really no point in denying such a request as there really shouldn't be any secrets in the results, it is openQA after all, run on the openSUSE 13.1 release candidate or Beta, how many secrets can there be? Just considering, the strong attempt at justifying why things are the way they are, is an indication that there is something fishy. If it were all straight forward as you indicate there should not be an issue and and should have been easy to say: """""" Yes, you are right we should have published the results, her they are..... But please note the results are not fully linked because there is information that requires authentication and the authentication issues are not resolved yet. """""" There you go, quite simple and straight forward that would have probably satisfied the request for published results.

...

I don't think so. So please, stop considering us to be "special". We don't do it.

Well, lets see, in just the last 3 or 4 weeks alone there have been voices of concern by various members of the community that the openSUSE team appears to be creating a barrier between itself and the community at large. These concerns do probably not stem from the fact that our contributors are paranoid. Personally I would say that it is more likely that these concerns are a reaction to the message that is received outside the @suse.com domain. But this is a separate discussion. The basic summary on the openQA topic is this: - There was a simple request for published results from openQA v2 - This request was denied with the referral to run one's own instance of openQA. Later, Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX Tech Lead Public Cloud Architect rjschwei@suse.com rschweik@ca.ibm.com 781-464-8147 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ancor Gonzalez Sosa

20:10

On 10/14/2013 08:42 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:

...

Hi,

OK, I'll bite.

On 10/14/2013 01:11 PM, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:

...
On 10/14/2013 05:01 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:

...
Hi,

Sorry for budding in, but.....

On 10/14/2013 05:44 AM, agustin benito bethencourt wrote:

...
Hi Guido,

On Monday 14 October 2013 11:10:45 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...
...
The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It is run

...
...
under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

...
...
...
...
We have developed some improvements in openQA in close communication with

...
...
upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements

...
...
should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

...
...
...
...
We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to

...
...
make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though.

...
...
Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the

...
...
distro and the improvements done.

...
So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?

Priviledge?

Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so.

I am not certain what part of "I don't have the resources..." in Guido's response is difficult to understand. However, given that it is apparently hard to comprehend that someone cannot run openQA on their own let me ask some questions rather than making statements.

Given the fact that at present we produce two different sets of results, the openQA results at openqa.opensuse.org and the forked instance operated by the openSUSE team, how do we expect a consistent view of the world for all contributors?

The fork of openQA is running on non community accessible hardware and thus maintainers of packages/sub-systems cannot see the results of the tests run by the forked code. It should be reasonably obvious that this is not a good situation. How can a maintainer of anything be expected to help fix an issue he/she is not aware of?

How can a contributor be aware of a problem when it is only displayed on results pages he/she cannot see?

The openSUSE Team is reporting bugs in bugzilla after diagnosing the problem behind every "red" test in that instance of openQA. Which is probably way more useful for most contributors than having access to the raw openQA results.

Well, if we would follow that logic we shouldn't be publishing the raw openQA results as it is today either. Rather we'd have someone "qualified" to interpret the results and file bugs all the time. Yes, I am being a bit fastidious, but you make it sound as if contributors are not qualified to draw their own conclusions.

Sorry. It was not my intention. What I was trying to say is that, since we are not able to provide direct access to the raw results, we are at least providing bug reports. I didn't mean that contributors were not able to draw their own conclusions.

...

Unless of course the raw results from v2 of openQA have changed dramatically such that contributors cannot understand them. In that case we have another problem.

...
...
Why is it so hard to mirror the results from the private instance of the openQA fork to a place where factory contributors can see the results?

All of this with the understanding that if the code that powers the fork of openQA the openSUSE team is running is integrated upstream the secondary results page becomes unnecessary and goes away.

The problem is not a lack of integration of the code with "upstream" (which means Bernhard M. Wiedemann and Dominik Heidler). The openSUSE Team have collaborated closely with upstream during the process. You can check for Bernhard and Dominik commits in the repositories of openSUSE V2. Right now, V1 will not be further developed, since V2 has all the blessing from upstream. Right now, it's not a fork. It's the next version.

But one of the strengths of V2 is also one of its weakness: a more powerful web interface that allows not only to read the results but also to enter a test into interactive mode, to re-schedule or rerun tests, etc. And right now, there is no access control for these actions. For that reason, openqa.opensuse.org is not running V2 right now. The responsible of the service (Bernhard) is looking for proper solutions and the openSUSE Team is trying to help him. Any other help is welcome.

Well even better, that should make it even easier to just publish the results you generate with the understanding that once the authentication issues are resolved the secondary results go away and everything shows back up at openqa.opensuse.org

Sorry, but I'm afraid I have not understood that part. In the sentece "that should make easier to publish the results", why do you mean with "that"? Having a new interface with more options?

...

...
...
...
Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

Why would you purposefully delay/impede the work of contributors that happen to work for someone other than SUSE?

We are not doing such a thing. We are not removing any tool or service. We are providing a new tool. We are using that tool with our own resources to create bug reports. Is everything about enabling the work of contributors.

I am sorry, but somehow I get the feeling the point is being missed here. Let me try this another way.

There was a relatively simple request in Guido's reply, I will paraphrase. "Publish the results from the openQA instance the openSUSE team is running"

The same request have been already done in the same thread by Richard Brown. And the replies were (I'm copying and pasting, not paraphrasing). From Ludwig: "We can rsync the test results anywhere. Voluteers to implement the read only view are welcome of course. Right now getting 13.1 done has priority though." From Alberto: "This idea is also very cool, and not very difficult to implement. As Ludwig said, [...] our priority is in another direction now. But openQA V2 source code is completely avaliable [...], so is possible to check good strategies to publish the results in a easy way."

...

The answer to that request was, again paraphrasing, "no, go run your own instance if you want results from openQA v2".

That phrase that you are paraphrasing was not a reply to the request itself. Was a reply to this sentence from Guido (I'm copying and pasting again): "So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?" Not so polite as you are pretending. The reply for the "I don't have access to openQA results anymore" part is in the same mail from Agustín (just slightly below): "We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so I have no info about why your workflow has changed. Maybe Bernhard is more qualified to provide you with a proper answer about this. Please ping him.

...

In my book this is denying a reasonable request and by extension impeding contributors with non @suse.com domain. It is really quite that simple.

Of course there is always the chance that my reading of the thread is off the wall, thus I can only encourage others to jump in.

Is, at least, different to mine. That's for sure.

...

...
...
If you already have the results and are aware of problems why can you not just share the results?

It's already explained. Technical issues. Bernhard and the openSUSE Team are working on it it. Help and constructive comments are welcome.

...
Why would you make the community wait for upstream inclusion of the forked code when you apparently already have results that may be useful but are not yet available upstream, for whatever reason.

Once again. I hope is already answered.

...
...
...
maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very

...
important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of

...
tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources

...
(i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own.

...
Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a

...
public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who

...
have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so

No one has asked you to fiddle with openqa.opensuse.org. Although closer collaboration with upstream may be a better use of everyone's time, those are decisions you have to make for your team. What is being asked is that you publish the results from your fork of openQA. This does not appear to be an unreasonable request, nor is it unfair to upstream.

Forking, public discussion, results publishing happen all the time in the FOSS community and we can all deal with it. What is not supposed to happen is that some think they are more special than others and willfully make the work of others more difficult.

Once again. We have helped to improve a tool

Yes, and the effort was recognized and well received as far as I can tell.

...
and while the new version is available in public resources, we are using our own resources to run that tool and provide bug reports.

Great thanks.

...
Does it means that we consider ourselves to be "more special than other"? We are not drawing that difference (considering us to be "more special"). You are doing it. If some community member not affiliated to SUSE decides to set up its own instance of openQA to test whatever he wants to test and he/she does not provide public access to his/her machine and results... Would you say that he/she is doing things wrong? Would you say that he/she is trying to feel "more special" or "privileged"? Would you blame him/her for willfully making the work of others more difficult?

If it is presented in the same way you are going about it the answer is a simple yes.

Of course I very much doubt that within the community we have someone or any other group of people that would deny a request to publish a set results somewhere. There is really no point in denying such a request as there really shouldn't be any secrets in the results, it is openQA after all, run on the openSUSE 13.1 release candidate or Beta, how many secrets can there be?

Once again. We HAVE NOT DECIDED to deny access to the raw results just because we don't want to share them. We are not giving direct access to them because there is a security issue. V2 lacks the proper security checks. But we are open to find a solution. Right now, we are focusing our work in other things, so we cannot invest time in fixing these deficiencies or implementing a workaround. But we have already asked for collaboration in order to find a way to "mirror" the results in some safe way. We have stated that several times in the thread. We are not hiding anything. Please, re-read the thread. We have provide a lot of information besides "run your own instance".

...

Just considering, the strong attempt at justifying why things are the way they are, is an indication that there is something fishy. If it were all straight forward as you indicate there should not be an issue and and should have been easy to say:

"""""" Yes, you are right we should have published the results, her they are..... But please note the results are not fully linked because there is information that requires authentication and the authentication issues are not resolved yet. """"""

There you go, quite simple and straight forward that would have probably satisfied the request for published results.

...
I don't think so. So please, stop considering us to be "special". We don't do it.

Well, lets see, in just the last 3 or 4 weeks alone there have been voices of concern by various members of the community that the openSUSE team appears to be creating a barrier between itself and the community at large. These concerns do probably not stem from the fact that our contributors are paranoid. Personally I would say that it is more likely that these concerns are a reaction to the message that is received outside the @suse.com domain. But this is a separate discussion.

The basic summary on the openQA topic is this:

- There was a simple request for published results from openQA v2 - This request was denied with the referral to run one's own instance of openQA.

In my opinion, that is a really really partial and strongly subjective view of the thread. But that is only my opinion, of course. Best. -- Ancor González Sosa openSUSE Team at Suse Linux GmbH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ancor Gonzalez Sosa

20:28

On 10/14/2013 10:10 PM, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:

...

Sorry, but I'm afraid I have not understood that part. In the sentece "that should make easier to publish the results", why do you mean with "that"? Having a new interface with more options?

Sorry. s/why/what I meant: WHAT do you mean with "that"? -- Ancor González Sosa openSUSE Team at Suse Linux GmbH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Richard Brown

18:47

On 14 Oct 2013 18:11, "Ancor Gonzalez Sosa" wrote:

...

The openSUSE Team is reporting bugs in bugzilla after diagnosing the problem behind every "red" test in that instance of openQA. Which is probably way more useful for most contributors than having access to the raw openQA results.

I know I've mentioned it already, but this comment made me feel like I should clarify. One of the best things openQA brings to the table, for me, is a 'reference' to compare my own testing to. This means I don't see openQA as just an automated, closed loop, "test->analyse->flag" system to provide flagged test failures ("red" or otherwise) for vetting and bug filing. I'll regularly use the raw openQA results to compare against my own results - not only does this save me having to ask in #opensuse-gnome IRC "does anyone else get xyz with abc?" but seeing those raw results gives me a solid picture of what is largely working in openSUSE - meaning I can focus my time testing on the bits which openQA doesn't cover or has flagged as potentially needing attention - it's quite often the 'yellows' that openQA finds that really need the work, and right now, we can't see what openQA v2 is finding. 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'd like to think of myself as a rather typical contributor who likes testing, and I'd like..no..I need to see as much information as possible about the automated test success/failures of openSUSE, so I know where I can best invest my time as a contributor, with the time consuming contributions of testing and bug resolution. Without that information, I risk duplicating work which openQA, the openSUSE team, or others, may have already completed, and that's not good for myself or the distribution. As Guido pointed out, this is most important at during the 'fluid' period before a release - You don't want contributors testing things which are already known, or trying to resolve issues that are already fixed. That's the #1 selling point of openQA - it's a testing platform hooked into OBS and so is in a position to provide that information to the community so we have a collective baseline to work from. Every day we don't have raw results from openQA is a day it's a little harder for community testers to efficiently test. I understand the explanations given regarding openQA v2, but that doesn't change the importance of as much information as possible so the community know what is broken & what to test. I see the last test result on openQA v1 was on 10/10/2013 - has there been no checkins to 13.1 since then or is something broken? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Ancor Gonzalez Sosa

19:25

On 10/14/2013 08:47 PM, Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 14 Oct 2013 18:11, "Ancor Gonzalez Sosa" wrote:

...
The openSUSE Team is reporting bugs in bugzilla after diagnosing the problem behind every "red" test in that instance of openQA. Which is probably way more useful for most contributors than having access to the raw openQA results. I know I've mentioned it already, but this comment made me feel like I should clarify.

I will also clarify my words, since I obviously explained wrongly, according to some reactions.

...

One of the best things openQA brings to the table, for me, is a 'reference' to compare my own testing to. This means I don't see openQA as just an automated, closed loop, "test->analyse->flag" system to provide flagged test failures ("red" or otherwise) for vetting and bug filing.

I'll regularly use the raw openQA results to compare against my own results - not only does this save me having to ask in #opensuse-gnome IRC "does anyone else get xyz with abc?" but seeing those raw results gives me a solid picture of what is largely working in openSUSE - meaning I can focus my time testing on the bits which openQA doesn't cover or has flagged as potentially needing attention - it's quite often the 'yellows' that openQA finds that really need the work, and right now, we can't see what openQA v2 is finding.

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.

...

I'd like to think of myself as a rather typical contributor who likes testing, and I'd like..no..I need to see as much information as possible about the automated test success/failures of openSUSE, so I know where I can best invest my time as a contributor, with the time consuming contributions of testing and bug resolution. Without that information, I risk duplicating work which openQA, the openSUSE team, or others, may have already completed, and that's not good for myself or the distribution.

As Guido pointed out, this is most important at during the 'fluid' period before a release - You don't want contributors testing things which are already known, or trying to resolve issues that are already fixed. That's the #1 selling point of openQA - it's a testing platform hooked into OBS and so is in a position to provide that information to the community so we have a collective baseline to work from. Every day we don't have raw results from openQA is a day it's a little harder for community testers to efficiently test.

I understand the explanations given regarding openQA v2, but that doesn't change the importance of as much information as possible so the community know what is broken & what to test.

I see the last test result on openQA v1 was on 10/10/2013 - has there been no checkins to 13.1 since then or is something broken?

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). Cheers. -- Ancor González Sosa openSUSE Team at Suse Linux GmbH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

agustin benito bethencourt

15 Oct 15 Oct

08:35

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

Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar

09:01

Quoting agustin benito bethencourt :

...

[long mail thread]

hi all, I just chime in, hoping that we can get the level of the list back to what we want to discuss on the list: openSUSE Factory and 13.1. A recap: * OP stated that openQA does not provide results. At this time, no information about openQA2 was 'broadly available' or of any interest to the 'wider community' * The initial response from Ludwig was, that SUSE (the openSUSE Team) developed it further (to openQA2) but the team ran out of time to 'complete' it, making it 'public accessible' => from there on, the thread spiral'ed around openQAv2. In fact, nobody really CARES (sorry, that's too harsh.. but in context true) about openQA2! All we need is openQA-1 (openqa.opensuse.org) providing results.. and THIS is the part that is currently not working. I understand this is out of reach of the openSUSE Team @ SUSE, but that also means, the openSUSE TEAM @ SUSE should not throw in statements based on a an observation that something does not work. This should have been left to Bernhard, who maintains openqa.opensuse.org. the pure fact that there was a statement coming, like " In spring the openSUSE team made a sprint to enhance openQA to make it even more useful for release testing. We mostly succeeded¹²³. Unfortunately we ran out of time to implement proper user managment. Since this new version allows interactive editing and rescheduling of tests in the web interface that is pretty much mandatory to run openQA in public though. So at the moment we have to run our release tests on a private instance unfortunately. " very much implies: we switched openQA off in favor of openQA2, but we cannot provide it. All the rest of the thread is just noise around the topic, without any value and as long as nobody can step back and look at the greater picture: we are just being pulled down, instead of focusing on making openSUSE 13.1 a great success. So, my begging to all of you: 'READ' the email, the thread, verify what the original question is and decide if YOU have to answer to the thread. *CAN YOU* provide value to the discussion? If not: maybe rethink if it's worthy to write your mail. And yes: I DID think about this mail and do believe that bringing it back to the essential issue is value; the essential issue being: * openQA.opensuse.org does not provide test results. Dominique -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Bruno Friedmann

18 Oct 18 Oct

19:06

On Tuesday 15 October 2013 11.01:10 Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar wrote:

...

Quoting agustin benito bethencourt :

...

And yes: I DID think about this mail and do believe that bringing it back to the essential issue is value; the essential issue being: * openQA.opensuse.org does not provide test results.

Dominique

Thanks Dominique, you perfectly express what I was thinking about this "mess". I would have added that if you think about improvement, the first rule would have been will it help the community to make 13.1 release easier. Ooops we miss the fact that it can't run in public is really astonish! This step simply avoid all the effort openSUSE Team has put in it. Too bad. We will survive, again, but things would have been so great with a working openqa. ps : if there's a way for openSUSE Team to rsync the raw result outside of suse.com network, please contact me in private, to check if I could provide those results to wider community. -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Greg Freemyer

20:05

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Bruno Friedmann wrote:

...

On Tuesday 15 October 2013 11.01:10 Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar wrote:

...
Quoting agustin benito bethencourt :

...
And yes: I DID think about this mail and do believe that bringing it back to the essential issue is value; the essential issue being: * openQA.opensuse.org does not provide test results.

Dominique

Thanks Dominique, you perfectly express what I was thinking about this "mess".

I would have added that if you think about improvement, the first rule would have been will it help the community to make 13.1 release easier. Ooops we miss the fact that it can't run in public is really astonish! This step simply avoid all the effort openSUSE Team has put in it. Too bad.

We will survive, again, but things would have been so great with a working openqa.

ps : if there's a way for openSUSE Team to rsync the raw result outside of suse.com network, please contact me in private, to check if I could provide those results to wider community.

I see it differently than you Bruno. What should have happened is: Q1: Why is the public openQA down? A1 (From SUSE QA team): We don't know and unfortunately the new and improved internal openQA R&D internal instance lacks features so we can't use it as a backup to the public openQA instance. Q2: Thanks but A1 is basically irrelevant at the moment, but can someone answer Q1. A2: The public instance started failing due to config change with 13.1 RC1. We will have it fixed shortly. Conclusion: Thanks for all your hard work for keeping the public instance working over the years. We look forward to the improvements the SUSE team created coming online at some point in the future. ==== Unfortunately A1 was poorly worded and gave the impression the internal SUSE work was in some way a cause of the public instance of openQA being down. We now know that was never the case, so blaming them know just furthers the false blame. Greg Greg -- Greg Freemyer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Stephan Kulow

19 Oct 19 Oct

13:42

Am 18.10.2013 21:06, schrieb Bruno Friedmann:

...

On Tuesday 15 October 2013 11.01:10 Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar wrote:

ps : if there's a way for openSUSE Team to rsync the raw result outside of suse.com network, please contact me in private, to check if I could provide those results to wider community.

Setup a openQA V2 version (devel:openQA should have all needed) and open a rsync port to sync /var/lib/openqa/testresults - right now the testresults page only shows what's in the file system, so that should do. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Bruno Friedmann

20 Oct 20 Oct

19:00

On Saturday 19 October 2013 15.42:55 Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

Am 18.10.2013 21:06, schrieb Bruno Friedmann:

...
On Tuesday 15 October 2013 11.01:10 Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar wrote:

ps : if there's a way for openSUSE Team to rsync the raw result outside of suse.com network, please contact me in private, to check if I could provide those results to wider community.

Setup a openQA V2 version (devel:openQA should have all needed) and open a rsync port to sync /var/lib/openqa/testresults - right now the testresults page only shows what's in the file system, so that should do.

Greetings, Stephan

Fair enough, I didn't yet have a 12.3 with big bandwidth server at hands. Have a rough estimate about the disk place and bandwidth needed for the task ? -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch openSUSE Member GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Stephan Kulow

21 Oct 21 Oct

07:45

On 20.10.2013 21:00, Bruno Friedmann wrote:

...

On Saturday 19 October 2013 15.42:55 Stephan Kulow wrote:

...
Am 18.10.2013 21:06, schrieb Bruno Friedmann:

...
On Tuesday 15 October 2013 11.01:10 Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar wrote:

ps : if there's a way for openSUSE Team to rsync the raw result outside of suse.com network, please contact me in private, to check if I could provide those results to wider community.

Setup a openQA V2 version (devel:openQA should have all needed) and open a rsync port to sync /var/lib/openqa/testresults - right now the testresults page only shows what's in the file system, so that should do.

Greetings, Stephan

Fair enough,

I didn't yet have a 12.3 with big bandwidth server at hands. Have a rough estimate about the disk place and bandwidth needed for the task ?

du -hs: 36G testresults Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Joachim Schrod

14 Oct 14 Oct

23:30

New subject: [opensuse-factory] Re: openQA

On 10/14/13 20:47, Richard Brown wrote:

...

I see the last test result on openQA v1 was on 10/10/2013 - has there been no checkins to 13.1 since then or is something broken?

Ahem, shouldn't this paragraph in your email be a separate email, because it adresses other people than the rest of your remark? Namely, the folks providing the service at openqa.o.o, and not software developers? Joachim [not affiliated with SUSE, in any way] PS: I find this thread interesting. I'm the CEO/owner of a consulting company. And while investing 100,000s of Euros in Open Source projects, we're often met with the same disdain as the openSUSE team from SUSE is met here. We're contributing software, and services are demanded, whom we cannot provide. To make an analogy, it's like if everybody who provides improvements to OBS is beholden to run its own instance and provide a full-fledged OBS service for the community. That way lays madness. On some late nights, it makes me wonder why I spend this money at all. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Joachim Schrod, Roedermark, Germany Email: jschrod@acm.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Alberto Planas

20:07

On Monday, October 14, 2013 11:01:23 AM Robert Schweikert wrote:

...

Hi,

Sorry for budding in, but.....

On 10/14/2013 05:44 AM, agustin benito bethencourt wrote:

...
Hi Guido,

On Monday 14 October 2013 11:10:45 Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
* agustin benito bethencourt [2013-10-14 10:46]:

...
The openSUSE Team at SUSE do not maintain openqa.opensuse.org. It

is run

...
...
under Bernhard's coordination with a remarkable effort, by the way.

We have developed some improvements in openQA in close

communication with

...
...
upstream (Bernhard). He is the one that will decides which improvements

should be implemented and which don't in the openQA service.

We developed the openQA V2 in the open and improved the installation to

make it easier than it was. There is room for improvements though.

Meanwhile, the openSUSE Team have a V2 instance internally to test the

distro and the improvements done.

So what makes SUSE emplyees special to get this privilege?

Priviledge?

Anybody can install an openQA V2 instance. We will provide help to those interested in doing so.

I am not certain what part of "I don't have the resources..." in Guido's response is difficult to understand. However, given that it is apparently hard to comprehend that someone cannot run openQA on their own let me ask some questions rather than making statements.

This response really hurt. openQA and openqa.o.o are owned by Bernhard M. Wiedemann. openQA was developed mainly by Bernhard himself and Dominik. In ther free time. Neither SUSE nor openSUSE Team (at SUSE) own, manage or decides in openqa.o.o During 12.3 we decided that openQA was a really cool project, and that we can help the Release Manager and the release process is we extend and improve openQA in certain ways. In an exercise of responsibility we presented a technical proposal to our managers. In this document we enumerated some basic goals that we expect to achieve is they allow us to work on openQA for 3 months. In other words, we asked SUSE to invest money on openSUSE. We worked on a local branch of os-autoinst and openQA during March, April and May, as you can check here: https://progress.opensuse.org/projects/openqa-improvement/issues/gantt?utf8=%E2%9C%93&set_filter=1&f[]=status_id&op[status_id]=*&f[]=&months=6&month=3&year=2013&zoom=2 During this time, we worked with Bernhard and Dominik to guarantee that the new features that we developed can be integrated in the real openQA (upstream). This was made explicit in its own task (as you can check in the previous Gantt). Overall, SUSE invested nearly $30K in our development time (aprox 500hrs). You can check this fact and the list of implemented features here: https://progress.opensuse.org/projects/openqa-improvement/wiki/Sprint_Report Also, we prepared packages and a tutorial, as you can learn from here: https://progress.opensuse.org/projects/openqa-improvement/wiki/Sprint_Report But all this work was made for two reasons: - To add some featured that can potentially help the release manager - To contribute to a cool open source project We helped upstream, but we are not the owner of the project: we are contributors.

...

Given the fact that at present we produce two different sets of results, the openQA results at openqa.opensuse.org and the forked instance operated by the openSUSE team, how do we expect a consistent view of the world for all contributors?

The 'forked' version is only an internal instance that is running in a local server. This server is a development server: the full team can access to this server in order to run, develop, break and fix openQA. We can make experiments and 'improvements' according our criteria. This internal server can't provide a service because is user for internal work.

...

The fork of openQA is running on non community accessible hardware and thus maintainers of packages/sub-systems cannot see the results of the tests run by the forked code. It should be reasonably obvious that this is not a good situation. How can a maintainer of anything be expected to help fix an issue he/she is not aware of?

Why? I mean: this is an internal server. The Real Thing is openqa.o.o. Upstream has the full control of openQA. They decide their own agenda, their own feature set, and their own priorities. This internal server is a internal working tool where we develop and where we break things. We don't have users and many things that The Real Thing need. Is an internal tool for an internal necessity/ Is not an internal tool because we are greedy and evil. We don't seek using the internal server something like 'a super secret openQA version', but only a tool for work on it.

...

How can a contributor be aware of a problem when it is only displayed on results pages he/she cannot see?

Again, The Real Thing (upstream) is openqa.o.o. So, in this case the contributor can do three different thing here: 1.- She/he can install openQA V1, V2 from Bernhard repo or V2 from openSUSE Team repo and run the tests locally 2.- Wait (and *help*) until upstream deploy the new version in the proper place. Bernhard actually put a big effort in this task as you can check here: https://hackweek.suse.com/projects/49

...

Why is it so hard to mirror the results from the private instance of the openQA fork to a place where factory contributors can see the results?

3.- Create an external mirror of our result page Create this mirror is not really hard (IMHO), but requires time, and we are now focused in a different task. You need to understand that one that decides in what project we need to work on is our manager and not external criteria like this one.

...

All of this with the understanding that if the code that powers the fork of openQA the openSUSE team is running is integrated upstream the secondary results page becomes unnecessary and goes away.

You can check that by yourself comparing both repos.

...

...
Another option is to wait until upstream include some/all of the changes we made. You can also work on V2.1

Why would you purposefully delay/impede the work of contributors that happen to work for someone other than SUSE?

Again: we are not upstream, we are contributors. How are we delaying / impeding the work from other contributors? We do no manage openqa.o.o, we do no manage upstream roadmap or deployment agenda. We do not maintain openqa.o.o neither.

...

If you already have the results and are aware of problems why can you not just share the results?

...

Why would you make the community wait for upstream inclusion of the forked code when you apparently already have results that may be useful but are not yet available upstream, for whatever reason.

We can't decide to open a new project to publish the results of the internal server (whatever that means). IMHO is unfair to demand from one contributor this kind of response. If you install OBS in your internal server, Who am I to demand that you need to publish the results for your internal instance of OBS, to invest your time to create the module that publish these results, and to maintain the server in a way that I demand?

...

...
...
I

maintain a whole desktop in openSUSE and openQA has been an very

important part of my workflow and I have contributed a bunch of

tests suited to my needs. And I simply do not have the resources

(i.e. bandwidth) to run an instance of my own.

Given that, would you please either mirror the results page to a

public server or provide those non-SUSE community members who

have a need for it access to the new instance?

We do not touch openqa.opensuse.org so

No one has asked you to fiddle with openqa.opensuse.org. Although closer collaboration with upstream may be a better use of everyone's time, those are decisions you have to make for your team. What is being asked is that you publish the results from your fork of openQA. This does not appear to be an unreasonable request, nor is it unfair to upstream.

Forking, public discussion, results publishing happen all the time in the FOSS community and we can all deal with it. What is not supposed to happen is that some think they are more special than others and willfully make the work of others more difficult.

We don't forked the project. We contributed to the project using a different branch. Upstream is the one that decides what to include and when.

...

Please publish the results from your fork of openQA in an effort to make things easier for everyone instead of just the few privileged.

The project need openqa.o.o deployed ASAP. Instead of helping Bernhard in this task you demand to a different team (that made a published contribution to openQA by technical reasons) to publish the results from their internal instance. I agree with the urge of having good feedback from openQA. Why waste the time in this fight instead of writing Perl code here: https://github.com/bmwiedemann/os-autoinst/tree/ost

...

My $0.02 Robert -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Bernhard M. Wiedemann

18 Oct 18 Oct

13:44

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 openQA.o.o is back. On 10/11/2013 08:52 AM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...

Hi,

why haven't there been any openQA runs on Factory and 13.1? At Beta/RC time it is more important than ever and there are e.g. problems net-installing the Xfce desktop post-Beta1 where openQA would really be helpful.

The reason for the lack of results was that openQA.o.o normally tests Factory isos and there were no more of them published after Beta1. I now switched it to 13.1 testing still using my older openQA software version, until openQA v2 is deployed there. I hope this is not too late to be helpful in assuring that 13.1 will be of high quality. Ciao Bernhard M. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlJhO0AACgkQSTYLOx37oWQKwgCgqO0UUo8XS3Qhoj4rOiSW9lhJ ousAoKdWPNtBZomYnooWHG7/elH0dfIA =RVkQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Robert Schweikert

14:21

On 10/18/2013 09:44 AM, Bernhard M. Wiedemann wrote:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

openQA.o.o is back.

Thank you Bernhard. -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center LINUX Tech Lead Public Cloud Architect rjschwei@suse.com rschweik@ca.ibm.com 781-464-8147 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

Guido Berhoerster

15:33

* Bernhard M. Wiedemann [2013-10-18 15:44]:

...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

openQA.o.o is back.

On 10/11/2013 08:52 AM, Guido Berhoerster wrote:

...
Hi,

why haven't there been any openQA runs on Factory and 13.1? At Beta/RC time it is more important than ever and there are e.g. problems net-installing the Xfce desktop post-Beta1 where openQA would really be helpful.

The reason for the lack of results was that openQA.o.o normally tests Factory isos and there were no more of them published after Beta1. I now switched it to 13.1 testing still using my older openQA software version, until openQA v2 is deployed there.

I hope this is not too late to be helpful in assuring that 13.1 will be of high quality.

Thank you, much appreciated. Please keep it alive until the replacement is fully ready. -- Guido Berhoerster -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org

3850

Age (days ago)

3860

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

33 comments

15 participants

participants (15)

agustin benito bethencourt
Alberto Planas
Ancor Gonzalez Sosa
Bernhard M. Wiedemann
Bruno Friedmann
Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a. Dimstar
Greg Freemyer
Guido Berhoerster
Joachim Schrod
Ludwig Nussel
Michal Hrusecky
Richard Brown
Robert Schweikert
Roman Bysh
Stephan Kulow