08:01:20 #startmeeting Functest weekly meeting July 11th 2017 08:01:20 Meeting started Tue Jul 11 08:01:20 2017 UTC. The chair is jose_lausuch. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 08:01:20 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 08:01:20 The meeting name has been set to 'functest_weekly_meeting_july_11th_2017' 08:01:20 morgan_orange: yes, the scenario name changed! :O 08:01:24 #topic role call 08:01:34 #info Jose Lausuch 08:01:34 #info Morgan 08:01:38 #chair morgan_orange 08:01:38 Current chairs: jose_lausuch morgan_orange 08:02:13 #info agenda for today: https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/Functest+5.+Meeting#Functest5.Meeting-11/07(8UTC) 08:02:26 #info Valentin Boucher 08:02:44 shall we add a topic for Danube 3.0 (it is today) or Euphrates MS 3.2 (test with a SDN controler :)) 08:03:22 yes 08:03:45 but I'm sure folks are more interested to talk about alpine :) 08:04:33 Merged functest: Allow regex for blacklist scenarios/installers https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/37073 08:04:34 another possible topic would be the testapi ...new restart needed this morning.. 08:04:51 but let's start with Alpine 08:05:00 ollivier: ping? 08:05:01 #topic Action Point follow-up 08:05:19 not so many people in the meeting today 08:05:29 Sorry, I was bothering ollivier with my questions :) 08:05:33 pong 08:05:38 #info Linda Wang 08:05:44 #info Cédric 08:05:47 #info AP ollivier create a wiki and list all the remaining issues that prevent us from fully using Alpine 08:05:50 Hello, World! 08:05:51 #info wiki created with instructions how to run the new containers https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/Running+new+Functest+containers 08:05:57 hello ollivier 08:06:04 #info AP ollivier publish Alpine Dockerfile in /docker/alpine/Dockerfile 08:06:08 #info DONE. Testing and feedback in progress 08:06:14 #info AP ollivier check tempest version to be used to run against Ocata. 08:06:21 #info DONE. According to upper constraints, it should be 14.0.0 08:06:27 anything to add ollivier ? 08:06:31 Yes 08:06:35 we have a topic 08:06:45 I think the last errors are not related to Alpine 08:06:52 #topic Alpine testing status 08:07:16 First I would appreciate we merge the pathes as it ease building the containers 08:07:30 (we download functest from amster) 08:07:40 Two testcases are failing snaps and refstack 08:07:46 https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/36963/12 ? 08:08:11 #info last errors (snaps / refstack) are not related to Alpine 08:08:16 Yes https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/q/topic:alpine+(status:open) 08:08:33 #info investigation in progress on snaps and refstack side 08:08:37 I will allow to automatically build the containers 08:08:42 I think we can merge now as they are accepted (>=2 +2s) 08:08:47 Merged functest: Add lesser containers based on Alpine https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/36963 08:08:58 regarding snaps: https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/37137/ 08:09:11 Merged functest: Add upper-constraints.txt for Functest https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/37077 08:09:12 Ubuntu container should fail as well 08:09:41 ollivier: why? 08:09:48 #info fixed bug in ansible test case https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/37137/ 08:10:02 It depends if default security group allows ssh or not 08:10:07 Merged functest: Download Functest's upper-constraints.txt https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/37097 08:10:15 if not, I bet it fails 08:10:17 Merged functest: Define CMD in smoke and healthcheck containers https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/37105 08:10:23 for snaps, would it make sense to ask Steven to grant the +2 to ollivier, jose_lausuch and LindaWang ..I think he is the only one to have the right to merge..so if he is in vacations...functest can be blocked 08:10:49 morgan_orange: yes, someone should have +2 rights just in case 08:10:55 strong upper-constraint ... 08:11:00 :) 08:11:02 I had to send him once an SMS to merge something while he was on vacation 08:11:11 and I felt so bad about it 08:11:26 Please give me an action point to automatically build the alpine container now 08:11:43 #action ollivier docker alpine image automatic build 08:11:59 #action jose_lausuch ask Steven to promote news snaps committer 08:12:03 It will be great if I can sync the official OPNFV github repo 08:12:21 I think Linda has done a lot of work on snaps repo, maybe she can be the candidate :) 08:12:24 jose_lausuch: Could you please send the request as proposed by email yesterday? 08:12:32 Else I must sync by hand my fork repo 08:12:42 #action sync with opnfv helpdesk for automatic builds from opnfv github mirror 08:12:42 ollivier: wow. 08:12:46 #undo 08:12:46 Removing item from minutes: 08:12:52 #action jose_lausuch sync with opnfv helpdesk for automatic builds from opnfv github mirror 08:13:07 ollivier: yes, I will 08:13:17 thank you 08:13:33 ollivier: do you know if the github hook in dockerhub can build multiple containers? 08:13:43 Yes. I'm ready 08:13:45 I did that once but with only 1 Dockerfile 08:14:20 I tested. But I didn't want to publish the hack to build refs instead of master. 08:14:25 ok 08:14:31 even in my github repo. 08:14:42 btw 08:14:46 I will do this morning. 08:14:47 how shall we publish the new images? 08:14:53 since we already have 08:14:59 opnfv/functest:latest or stable 08:15:06 what will be the tag for the new ones? 08:15:22 as we have 1 docker hub repo for functest 08:15:29 I would propose to keep ollivier/functest-core etc. as long as releng doesn't handle multiple containers 08:16:02 so in the end we will have 08:16:12 I will automate the build. If your request is accepted (to sync official repo), it will work as well 08:16:15 opnfv/functest-core:latest or stable or euphrates.1.0 08:16:24 yes 08:16:26 opnfv/functest-smoke:latest or stable or euphrates.1.0 08:16:35 then we need to request creating more repos for functest 08:16:48 Docker repo, yes 08:16:50 how many do we need? 08:16:53 yes, docker repos 08:17:06 functest-core, functes-smoke, functest-features 08:17:07 features, components, vnfs 08:17:14 let's list them here 08:17:18 one per suite + core for functest itself 08:17:37 then we could split more... 08:17:38 #info new docker repos needed: functest-core, functest-smoke, functest-features, functest-components, functest-vnfs 08:17:46 healthcheck 08:18:05 it's listed on the gerrit change i think 08:18:19 #info functest-healthcheck 08:18:19 ok 08:18:20 note in components it is tempest and rally full ...the ondly difference with smoke will be the configuration of rally and tempest 08:18:22 https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/36963/ 08:18:28 #info 1 docker repo per tier 08:18:34 well, that's right 08:18:39 maybe we don't need functest-components 08:18:47 Are you sure for vnfs container ? 08:18:53 +1 for core. It's the key as all inherit from it 08:19:12 jose_lausuch ollivier: i believe there is no need for functest-components 08:19:12 boucherv: Do you a special ims one :) 08:19:23 Because the VNF requierement are really differents between each VNF 08:19:41 I know buyt we have to improve it as well 08:19:50 ok 08:20:05 for now, 1 container for all VNFs 08:20:07 and then we will see 08:20:10 right? 08:20:58 yes - we do not have so many VNFs... cloudify_ims, orchestra_ims, opera_ims, cloudify_vyos maybe juju_epc... 08:21:08 Yes. don't be afraid it will quite simple to split again. The main work is about defining requirements, upper requirements. Then it's just splitting the files and creating the right testcases.yaml 08:21:18 ok 08:21:19 and for the moment on master only cloudify_ims 08:21:29 ok 08:21:34 anything else about alpine topic? 08:21:42 good work ollivier 08:21:56 considering alpine testing next steps is to start testing features 08:21:57 I think it's right to time to switch to Alpine (testing) 08:21:59 we will follow up next week to see what the progress is 08:22:13 ollivier: i'd like to help refstack issues in Alpine 08:22:17 #action jose_lausuch request a virtual deployment job for alpine testing 08:22:18 shall we allocate also the feature to split the load 08:22:20 CI/CD checks the ubuntu one. 08:22:55 do we have a good view of the features for Euphrates... 08:23:11 morgan_orange: those that are enabled :) 08:23:12 The main point was to create all the requires files. Now I will init the next containers, clone ODL, get rid of tacker scripts... 08:23:30 I bet that feature projects that really care about the test in CI, will realize if the test case is enabled or not 08:23:52 But I require your help to fix refstack and snaps 08:24:04 LindaWang: thank you Linda 08:24:24 yes but even. promise asked to be enabled but according to the repo stats, the activity is very low... 08:24:24 Sure. I will try my best. 08:24:37 LindaWang: sure I will help you 08:25:10 we can't block feature test if they want to be in CI because of the activity is slow 08:25:15 but I get your point 08:25:21 Regarding the container, Promise adds a lot of requirements 08:25:35 nodejs, right? 08:25:38 yes 08:26:16 I think we must oblige third party to follow new rules. I'm fixing the third party projects so much... 08:26:57 I think there is an action point about requirements too. 08:26:59 but what can we do if they require new packages to be installed? 08:27:18 yes, for example, domino test case does pip install in the domino script itself 08:27:21 First we must get rid of dedicated installation script 08:27:32 They must follow OpenSTack's requirements. 08:27:39 #action jose_lausuch review all the enabled feature test if they perform any package installation 08:27:58 If the project hosts python scipt, they must provide a good python package as well 08:28:11 yes 08:28:17 Quite trivial. 08:28:19 some of them are simply shellscripts 08:28:25 copper/domino,... 08:28:42 If they require nodejs. Why not but we rely on ubuntu or alpine package 08:28:59 yes 08:29:10 Quite trivial rules... 08:29:29 maybe we could put those rules in the wiki 08:29:39 but don't want to action more :) 08:29:45 can we move to next topic? 08:30:00 You can. 08:30:01 yes 08:30:06 ok 08:30:11 #topic Add images in Functest 08:30:17 I'm not sure what you propose in Alpine 08:30:25 but in Ubuntu image we have add_images and download_images 08:30:41 add_images are injected in the docker build 08:30:50 download images separated, to be added as a docker volume 08:30:52 my suggestion was to get rid of add_images.sh 08:30:54 WXe must get rid of that 08:30:56 what do you think? 08:31:04 Actually download_images.sh is enough 08:31:16 download images doesn't include cirros, right? 08:31:19 I think the containers should embed images and me must keep only one script to download 08:31:25 shouldn't 08:31:29 https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/Running+new+Functest+containers 08:31:33 yes, agree, shouldn't 08:31:33 jose_lausuch: no 08:31:45 download_images has all images required 08:31:55 Yes but there is one issue in it 08:32:15 We should add argument about the tiers... For healthcheck we require only cirros 08:32:51 smoke requires Centos and ubuntu 08:33:03 Oh, we have to add firewall_block_image.img into download_images, if we decide to remove add_images 08:33:05 (None requires Debian??) 08:33:20 True. 08:33:23 yes 08:33:34 so, do we agree on removing add_images.sh ? 08:34:10 Only snaps_smoke needs Centos and ubuntu 14.04 08:34:11 and tweak download_images to not download everything everytime? (e.g. add arguments, conditions, ..) 08:34:14 One or the other... Both have pros and cons. I think you should allow specifying a dest dir (default value the functest dir) 08:34:21 bgpvpn need ubuntu 16.04 08:34:38 the idea is to have a docker volume with the images from a local download dir 08:34:39 add tiers as arg as well 08:34:59 #info agreed to remove add_images.sh, container images shouldn't embed images 08:35:11 We must download md5sum as well 08:35:17 #info add arguments in download_images.sh for different containers/images 08:35:33 #info add md5sum to comply with ONFV security audit 08:35:46 to comply with standards :) 08:35:51 as well 08:36:07 ok 08:36:28 I Will take the point of proposing removing add_images.sh script 08:36:38 and then we will further think how to structure download_images.sh 08:36:52 #action jose_lausuch propose a patch without add_images.sh 08:37:02 anything else? 08:37:03 Could you check which one is called by gating 08:37:10 gating? 08:37:39 We require download images in jjobs if ubuntu get rid of images 08:38:08 I don't quite get your point 08:38:19 yes, we require download_images.sh in CI currently 08:38:49 ok. 08:40:35 #topic Enabling cloudify_ims (and vnf) in daily 08:40:36 we had a topic about vims 08:40:38 #topic Enabling cloudify_ims (and vnf) in daily 08:40:39 uh 08:40:41 #undo 08:40:41 Removing item from minutes: 08:40:49 #info config done 08:41:08 #info wait for master CI run going beyond smoke tests... 08:41:24 #info vims enabled in daily jobs https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/36869/ 08:42:00 anything else you want to cmment? 08:42:02 #info contact with other people working on VNF onboarding tests (orchestra_ims juju_epc) => should be ready to start working on their integration on a community lab 08:42:27 LindaWang: do you know if soemone will look at opera_ims or due to ONAP changes, nothing is planned? 08:42:35 for Euphrates 08:42:45 Do you mean from Huawei team? 08:42:57 yes I think Jelan worked on that for Dnaube 08:43:14 %s/Jelan/Helan/ 08:43:19 But Helen has left. 08:43:38 Now I will check with compass team about that 08:43:45 ok 08:44:05 #action LindaWang check with Compass team about opera_ims status due to ONAP changes 08:44:20 as there is apparently no more open-o scenario (waiting for an onap scenario?) I think this case will not be available for Euphrates, but if you can confirm with Comapss team, it will be great 08:44:36 #topic Logger (Valentin) 08:44:59 #info there has been a discussion by email about having a user-friendly console output for testcases 08:45:32 #info currently, we mute all the output on screen while a testcase is running, and to see the logs you must go to the functest.log or others 08:46:03 #info question is: how difficult is to implement a flag in runtest.py to enable that output? does it make sense? is it useful for our users? 08:46:21 #info this is fine for CI or short test when done manually but it may be misleady for long tests (everything seems frozen) 08:46:52 in my opinion, it is useful and we will get some questions in the mailing list about it (I already got some) 08:47:43 I'm afraid we can't use the config anymore 08:47:43 I like the -v option 08:48:11 I like the -v option too 08:48:26 ollivier: I thought about a very ugly idea, and I bet you don't like it :) what about if that flag is passed to run_tests.py, it will modify logging.ini and change it back at the end? 08:48:35 It will oblige core modules to init the loggers... I'm sorry I strongly focused on Alpine and I did'nt progress on that point. 08:49:26 jose_lausuch: The only good way is to adapt on the fly the objects described in logging.ini... But I think we can't 08:49:27 ollivier: but do you have a good idea? maybe someone else can help to implememt it 08:49:33 How about a env variable for CI or not like check if a build_tag exist 08:50:22 if exist functest test are in wconsole and if not exist in console 08:50:32 and console by default 08:50:41 boucherv: you mean, configuring logging.ini in prepare_env according to that env variable? 08:51:03 looks strenge but I see your point 08:51:52 why not. but the hack must be located in every entry point. 08:52:25 really? 08:52:34 why can't prepare_env do that modification once? 08:53:22 For classical functest processing it's fine... 08:53:48 it's maybe a short term solution 08:53:51 but not sure what's the best way 08:53:58 boucherv: do you want to take the AP? 08:54:02 yes. I think it's the best short term proposal I have seen 08:54:27 prepare_env hacks logging.ini according to options. 08:54:35 I have no time to do that :/ 08:54:45 I can try 08:54:45 Focus on my internship report .. 08:55:04 but don't promise, also due to time, but will try, and it's not urgent 08:55:04 push the jira report inside it :) 08:55:32 #action jose_lausuch propose a way to hack logging.ini in prepare_env according to env variable 08:55:36 env variable CI_DEBUG ? 08:55:43 since we already have it in the jjobs? 08:58:44 ok 08:58:47 I will use CI_DEBUG 08:58:57 #topic Rest API 08:59:00 morgan_orange: ? 08:59:57 #info restart needed this morning - the statbility issue reported by Serena is not fixed 09:00:19 #info simple restart is enough but I have a doubt on the version currently running as paginations per cases is no more there 09:00:42 #action serena-zte morgan_orange jose_lausuch sync on test API issues 09:01:10 note there is a sync meeting with Bitergia on thursday 09:01:15 ok 09:01:22 for the moment their data set is very small 09:01:30 I had a look yesterday in the mongo DB 09:01:56 singleNodeRepl:PRIMARY> db.results.count({"project_name":"functest"}) 09:01:56 141564 09:02:11 singleNodeRepl:PRIMARY> db.results.count({"project_name":"yardstick"}) 09:02:11 11400 09:02:25 db.results.count({"project_name":"functest","version":"danube"}) 09:02:25 27353 09:02:33 db.results.count({"scenario":"os-nosdn-nofeature-ha"}) 09:02:34 24124 09:02:38 db.results.count({"scenario":"os-odl_l2-nofeature-ha"}) 09:02:39 22006 09:03:02 what mongodb? 09:03:10 The test DB 09:03:26 so we shall have much more than we they are showing https://opnfv.biterg.io/goto/dd9aa660f1fa5d8dd63f7f455609aa80 09:04:07 #info sync meeting with Bitergia on thursday 09:04:10 #info sync meeting with Bitergia on Thursday (testing working group) 09:04:14 #undo 09:04:14 Removing item from minutes: 09:04:36 :) 09:04:41 ok 09:04:50 we can raise that topic on thursday 09:04:55 any other thing? 09:04:56 or we close? 09:05:09 we didn't talk about danube.3.0 but you sent a very detailed email about the status 09:05:10 thanks morgan_orange 09:07:00 #endmeeting