QA (public) » openQA Project (public) » openQA Tests (public)

okurz wrote:

AFAIU sunny is fine with taking the offline migration scenarios of openQA into the migration job group. That currently involves x86_64 and ppc64le. s390x is currently under development and not yet touched by this.

@mitiao: Do you agree to move the according scenarios into the migration job group? If yes, please do so.

Yes, I will do it.

hm, good point. As we want more functional groups for each product I suggest to split the online migration group per product and put offline+online together in one job group for each product as you have it already for Server and Desktop. As HA is considered its own product it would mean to also split that into a parent group "HA" with a subgroup "Acceptance: HA" and a subgroup "Migration" like this:

• Server

  • Acceptance: Server
  • Kernel
  • FIPS
  • Migration <-- including both offline+online but only for SLES

• Desktop

  • …
  • Migration

• HA

  • …
  • Migration

Also, it was already mentioned that "Acceptance: Server" is not a good name and "Functional" would better describe it (by @sebchlad, @maritawerner).

so I see the following tasks:

• Rename existing job groups "Online Migration" to just "Migration"
• Create new parent group "HA"
• Move existing job group "HA" into the new parent and rename "Functional"
• Rename "Acceptance: Server" to "Functional"
• Rename "Acceptance: Desktop" to "Functional"

@all: agreed?

+1

Combined migration scenarios for each product in following job groups:

Migration: Server
Migration: Desktop
Migration: HA

Also created functional group for HA and rename acceptance groups for Server and Desktop as following:

Functional: Server
Functional: Destkop
Functional: HA

I still remain the product suffix because that would be confused with many same name gropus shown in different folder in page https://openqa.suse.de/admin/groups if suffix removed.
Maybe better to have sub-name to differ them?

Also I removed 'Acceptance' for FIPS since it is only for Server.

Please have a review for all of my changes.
Thanks.

I still remain the product suffix because that would be confused with many same name gropus shown in different folder in page https://openqa.suse.de/admin/groups if suffix removed.
Maybe better to have sub-name to differ them?

I understand the problem but I think it is only for the admin during creation of the job groups. I propose to leave out the sub-name. Or do you see a problem which would be visible by non-admin users, too?

okurz wrote:

I still remain the product suffix because that would be confused with many same name gropus shown in different folder in page https://openqa.suse.de/admin/groups if suffix removed.
Maybe better to have sub-name to differ them?

I understand the problem but I think it is only for the admin during creation of the job groups. I propose to leave out the sub-name. Or do you see a problem which would be visible by non-admin users, too?

Yes, this problem is only for admin, for 'Operater' they can access above page without edit privilege and for 'User' they don't have permission to access it.
Without consideration of admin page, it's fine to remove suffix, and I will do it.

mitiao wrote:

okurz wrote:

I still remain the product suffix because that would be confused with many same name gropus shown in different folder in page https://openqa.suse.de/admin/groups if suffix removed.
Maybe better to have sub-name to differ them?

I understand the problem but I think it is only for the admin during creation of the job groups. I propose to leave out the sub-name. Or do you see a problem which would be visible by non-admin users, too?

Yes, this problem is only for admin, for 'Operater' they can access above page without edit privilege and for 'User' they don't have permission to access it.
Without consideration of admin page, it's fine to remove suffix, and I will do it.

Trid and given 'Unable to apply changes'.
Seems now openQA doesn't supprot same name for job group

All proxyscc online migration server scenarios are in Migration: Server job group.
Should I move the scenarios involved with ha addon into Migration: HA job group like offline migration do?

Should I move the scenarios involved with ha addon into Migration: HA
job group like offline migration do?

I think that makes sense

please check the so called "autoupgrade" testsuites which are still in the "Functional: Server" group: https://openqa.suse.de/tests/overview?distri=sle&version=12-SP3&groupid=55

To me it seems they are "migration jobs" based on autoyast configuration files, right? E.g. see https://openqa.suse.de/tests/780094#step/bootloader/6 for the "autoyast*.xml autoupgrade=1" typing

Moved them into Migration: Server group.
@dgutu are you maintaining these 5 autoupgrade by autoyast configuration files?
If any unknown issue on them, I could ask you. :)