[yt-dev] Testing Infrastructure: Datasets for ART, Orion, FLASH, etc ...

[Matthew Turk]

I forgot to point at the URL for the Shining Panda instance:

https://jenkins.shiningpanda-ci.com/yt-project/

New repos we pull from and test will show up here.

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Nathan et al,
>
> We just got approved for a FLOSS license on Shining Panda.  As it
> currently stands, we can't mount EBS volumes, so answer testing will
> not be a part of this initiative as of right now.  Kacper's suggested
> we explore other options for answer testing, and I think he's right --
> particularly because we may end up using a lot of memory and putting
> strain on an individual node, and that's probably bad karma.  So I
> think we should keep the two somewhat separately tested for now, and
> continue creating unit tests that test either randomly created
> in-memory data or isolated functionality.
>
> I can add users and administrators to the SP account:
>
> https://www.shiningpanda-ci.com/docs/dashboard/multiusers.html
>
> We also can identify different repos that get pulled from to test.  I
> think we definitely want to test the main yt repository and the main
> yt-3.0 repository (once it has tests finalized.)  We can also add a
> few "semi-trusted" repositories -- for instance, Sam does a lot of
> development in his fork, so he may want to have it added to the
> buildbots.  I do a lot, so I may also want mine added.
>
> If you have a "user" role you can make it test any time you want.
>
> If you have an administrator role you can do the same but also add new
> repos to test.
>
> Would anyone like to be added as a "user"?  I think this would also
> need to coincide with having your personal repository added as a
> testing location.  For administrator, I think we should restrict to
> people who have been really involved in the pull request and code
> mentoring process.
>
> Kacper and I are going to hash out some answer testing stuff in IRC
> before coming back to the list with any ideas.  But clearly we need to
> ensure we cover both answer testing AND unit testing in the
> infrastructure we develop.
>
> -Matt
>
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12343 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> $144/year is well worth it and it's probably good karma to support them since they have to pay for the infrastructure.
>>
>> +1 (although it's not my money ;)
>>
>> On Oct 12, 2012, at 3:25 PM, Matthew Turk wrote:
>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> I've emailed Shining Panda about this, but if they don't
>>>> have the ability to provide us with a FLOSS license, I think we can
>>>> identify some funding to do this.
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> Okay, we're laughably far back in their queue.  I'm inclined to think
>>> that if we get a couple people who look at Shining Panda, think it
>>> looks good and so on, that we just upgrade the plan to be paid for so
>>> that we don't have to wait and we can fix this problem now instead of
>>> in some distant date.  What do y'all think?
>>>
>>> http://shiningpanda-ci.com
>>>
>>> -Matt
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yt-dev mailing list
>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-dev mailing list
>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org