|
Re: Jenkins Robot test failures
Hi,
There are other jobs with the same features that are not reporting these GC Failures.
eg:
Hi,
There are other jobs with the same features that are not reporting these GC Failures.
eg:
|
By
Venkatrangan Govindarajan
·
#14571
·
|
|
Re: Jenkins Robot test failures
Hi,
I will check today evening and let you know
Hi,
I will check today evening and let you know
|
By
Venkatrangan Govindarajan
·
#14570
·
|
|
Jenkins Robot test failures
Hi,
I have a problem with failling Robot tests in two Jenkins jobs:
- controller-csit-3node-clustering-ask-all-sulfur
- controller-csit-3node-clustering-tell-all-sulfur
It seems that odl_3 node is
Hi,
I have a problem with failling Robot tests in two Jenkins jobs:
- controller-csit-3node-clustering-ask-all-sulfur
- controller-csit-3node-clustering-tell-all-sulfur
It seems that odl_3 node is
|
By
Dominik Vrbovsky <dominik.vrbovsky@...>
·
#14569
·
|
|
Re: [opendaylight-dev][release] OpenDaylight - Phosphorus SR1
Great, thanks! all we are missing is to update downloads page.. @LAMBERT Guillaume TGI/OLN can you help us with that?
Thanks
--
Daniel de la Rosa
ODL Release Manager
Great, thanks! all we are missing is to update downloads page.. @LAMBERT Guillaume TGI/OLN can you help us with that?
Thanks
--
Daniel de la Rosa
ODL Release Manager
|
By
Daniel de la Rosa
·
#14568
·
|
|
Re: [opendaylight-dev][release] OpenDaylight - Phosphorus SR1
OK, I just released the distribution with the old job name, we can fix the name for the next
OK, I just released the distribution with the old job name, we can fix the name for the next
|
By
Luis Gomez
·
#14567
·
|
|
Re: [opendaylight-dev][release] OpenDaylight - Phosphorus SR1
I have just realized there is a typo in the distribution stage job:
https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/c/releng/builder/+/98797
If anyone can review & merge, I can release the distribution tomorrow
I have just realized there is a typo in the distribution stage job:
https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/c/releng/builder/+/98797
If anyone can review & merge, I can release the distribution tomorrow
|
By
Luis Gomez
·
#14566
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
Hello
FYI I’ve proposed an open talk about the release process for the next DDF so that we can debate about it.
About TransportPCE, since Silicon I can’t see any advantage to stay SM
Hello
FYI I’ve proposed an open talk about the release process for the next DDF so that we can debate about it.
About TransportPCE, since Silicon I can’t see any advantage to stay SM
|
By
Guillaume Lambert
·
#14565
·
|
|
Re: [opendaylight-dev][release] OpenDaylight - Phosphorus SR1
Thank you Christophe and all. . @Luis Gomez , you can now proceed to release Phosphorus SR1 distribution.
Thank you Christophe and all. . @Luis Gomez , you can now proceed to release Phosphorus SR1 distribution.
|
By
Daniel de la Rosa
·
#14564
·
|
|
Re: [opendaylight-dev][release] OpenDaylight - Phosphorus SR1
Hello,
I have just successfully released TransportPCE for Phosphorus SR1 tagged with version 4.1.0.
You can find the log output
Hello,
I have just successfully released TransportPCE for Phosphorus SR1 tagged with version 4.1.0.
You can find the log output
|
By
Christophe Betoule
·
#14563
·
|
|
[opendaylight-dev][release] OpenDaylight - Phosphorus SR1
Hello All,
OpenDaylight Phosphorus SR1 version bump is complete and the staging repository is being promoted. The 'stable/phosphorus' branch is unlocked.
Pending activities required to be complete for
Hello All,
OpenDaylight Phosphorus SR1 version bump is complete and the staging repository is being promoted. The 'stable/phosphorus' branch is unlocked.
Pending activities required to be complete for
|
By
Anil Belur
·
#14562
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
I wasn't really questioning why there are two release tracks. Just that it would be nice and could be possible to make the process a little simpler & more automated to reduce confusion and potential
I wasn't really questioning why there are two release tracks. Just that it would be nice and could be possible to make the process a little simpler & more automated to reduce confusion and potential
|
By
Sangwook Ha
·
#14561
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
Yes, Silicon SR3 has shown TCPE can easily manage being an MRI project. Unimgr is irrelevant, as they still work on kernel from a few years back.
Regards,
Robert
Yes, Silicon SR3 has shown TCPE can easily manage being an MRI project. Unimgr is irrelevant, as they still work on kernel from a few years back.
Regards,
Robert
|
By
Robert Varga
·
#14560
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
Yes there is and there is quite a bit of history attached to that.
Our governance clearly states that each project is independent, which in this context means is free to release whenever as well as
Yes there is and there is quite a bit of history attached to that.
Our governance clearly states that each project is independent, which in this context means is free to release whenever as well as
|
By
Robert Varga
·
#14559
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
AFAIK, TPCE is going to be managed from Sulfur or even Phosphorus so makes sense to consolidate to a single repo.
--
Daniel de la Rosa
ODL Release Manager
AFAIK, TPCE is going to be managed from Sulfur or even Phosphorus so makes sense to consolidate to a single repo.
--
Daniel de la Rosa
ODL Release Manager
|
By
Daniel de la Rosa
·
#14558
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
BTW below I meant "consolidate back to single distribution".
BTW below I meant "consolidate back to single distribution".
|
By
Luis Gomez
·
#14557
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
I think the part that is confusing is to have 2 distros so different (life-cycle, release, tagging, etc) in the same repo, I remember we did this long time back because we wanted to avoid having a new
I think the part that is confusing is to have 2 distros so different (life-cycle, release, tagging, etc) in the same repo, I remember we did this long time back because we wanted to avoid having a new
|
By
Luis Gomez
·
#14556
·
|
|
Re: integration/distribution version issues
Just 2 things:
- The common distribution (opendaylight/pom.xml) has never been governed by auto-release or automatic bump for that matter, please recheck your links if you do not believe. Also the
Just 2 things:
- The common distribution (opendaylight/pom.xml) has never been governed by auto-release or automatic bump for that matter, please recheck your links if you do not believe. Also the
|
By
Luis Gomez
·
#14555
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
Regarding the version mismatch for the common release, what I meant was for the karaf version in 'opendaylight/pom.xml' and the other versions - for example, release tag '14.3.0' would have the karaf
Regarding the version mismatch for the common release, what I meant was for the karaf version in 'opendaylight/pom.xml' and the other versions - for example, release tag '14.3.0' would have the karaf
|
By
Sangwook Ha
·
#14554
·
|
|
Re: [E] Re: [integration-dev] integration/distribution version issues
Looking at the release & version bump cycle, some of the steps may be simplified, and hopefully automated:
- For each release of managed projects, release & version bump, are done separately a few
Looking at the release & version bump cycle, some of the steps may be simplified, and hopefully automated:
- For each release of managed projects, release & version bump, are done separately a few
|
By
Sangwook Ha
·
#14553
·
|
|
Re: integration/distribution version issues
Three, actually.
Yes, and therefore the release lifecycle of int/dist is unlike any other project I have come across.
Right-o, but unfortunately you are explaining something completely off-topic, so
Three, actually.
Yes, and therefore the release lifecycle of int/dist is unlike any other project I have come across.
Right-o, but unfortunately you are explaining something completely off-topic, so
|
By
Robert Varga
·
#14552
·
|