QA (public) » openQA Project (public) » openQA Infrastructure (public)

okurz wrote:

Issues I see¶

• It takes quite long to load

I'll need numbers and expectations for this. While grafana is indeed some monster of javascript it takes a reasonable time on my machine (logged in as well as guest).
Best if we sit together and you just show me your bad experience.

• shows a big red blob in the middle that seemingly no one cares about (arm-3 worker)

This is handled in https://progress.opensuse.org/issues/41882 and should be resolved by now.

• I can not see any way how to find a ticket or something linked to alarms so that I can see that an issue is already handled

Valid, taken. Until now I have to fall back to E-Mails on MLs in case of problems. But I guess I will also include a link to the infrastructure backlog as a quick solution. WDYT?

• the email adresses for feedback should IMHO be openqa@suse.de and not departement related mailing lists. Most people from QA might be interested but not all but also there are more people outside QA

We decided for this ML with seba until we have a dedicated ML for monitoring related stuff. The details are still open for discussion and I'll try to include you if they happen.
What I don't get is how people from outside of QA should be interested in improvements sent to that ML?

• the email adresses for feedback should IMHO be openqa@suse.de and not departement related mailing lists. Most people from QA might be interested but not all but also there are more people outside QA

We decided for this ML with seba until we have a dedicated ML for monitoring related stuff. The details are still open for discussion and I'll try to include you if they happen.
What I don't get is how people from outside of QA should be interested in improvements sent to that ML?

Or to extend the point from Nick ("how people from outside of QA should be interested in improvements sent to that ML") - having magical openqa@suse.de helps people to fall into a trap of magically solved openQA problems.
I would prefer to have well understood responsibilities by QAM and QA SLE that openQA/osd is meant to be maintained by them (us).
Please be careful while using openqa@suse.de as this might dilute the understanding that we (qa teams) should care about openQA/osd

nicksinger wrote:

Valid, taken. Until now I have to fall back to E-Mails on MLs in case of problems. But I guess I will also include a link to the infrastructure backlog as a quick solution. WDYT?

Yes, could help. Feels like a bit too much manual work though.

sebchlad wrote:

Or to extend the point from Nick ("how people from outside of QA should be interested in improvements sent to that ML") - having magical openqa@suse.de helps people to fall into a trap of magically solved openQA problems.
I would prefer to have well understood responsibilities by QAM and QA SLE that openQA/osd is meant to be maintained by them (us).
Please be careful while using openqa@suse.de as this might dilute the understanding that we (qa teams) should care about openQA/osd

granted but why not qa-css with the HA/SAP tests? sle-release-coords@suse.de or devel@suse.de considering that now even more development teams either use osd or rely on it (staging tests)? My point being: Either include potentially everyone by broadcasting wider or use a dedicated ML where interested people sign up.