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