I would say let's keep it around until we EOL f29 Atomic Host. Let's not put any investment into it or migrating it elsewhere.

Reviving this thread Recently Fedora 29 went EOL [1] and with that we also did final Fedora Atomic Host release and its EOL announcement [2] . I think we should be good with deprecating autocloud now unless we want to keep using it for running tests on Fedora Cloud images.

On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:47 PM Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:39 AM Sinny Kumari <ksinny(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:19 AM Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com&gt; wrote: > > > > > Or could we move f29+ all to whatever is replacing it? (taskotron?) > > > > > > > It will be nice but I am not aware of any other system in place which > > would > > replace checks performed by autocloud. > > > > (CC'ed tflink and kparal) > > Does taskotron provides capability to perform tests on Fedora cloud > > Images like booting images and other basic checks? > > > > Theoretically it is possible using nested virt. However, Taskotron is > going away as well. The replacement is Fedora CI: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/ > Thanks kamil! yeah, it doesn't make sense to move to Taskotron if it is going to be deprecated as well. > I recommend to ask in the CI list: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ci%40lists.fedoraproject.org/ > > It should be possible for them to provide the infrastructure you need. > Hmm, I am not very sure if we should spend time investigating and setting up alternative to autocloud unless we have usecases for long run. Fedora Atomic Host Two Week releases ends with F29 EOL.

On 5/1/19 10:20 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2019-04-29 at 18:57 +0530, Sinny Kumari wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 4:47 PM Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:39 AM Sinny Kumari <ksinny(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 12:19 AM Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>>> Or could we move f29+ all to whatever is replacing it? (taskotron?) >>>>> >>>> >>>> It will be nice but I am not aware of any other system in place which >>>> would >>>> replace checks performed by autocloud. >>>> >>>> (CC'ed tflink and kparal) >>>> Does taskotron provides capability to perform tests on Fedora cloud >>>> Images like booting images and other basic checks? >>>> >>> >>> Theoretically it is possible using nested virt. However, Taskotron is >>> going away as well. The replacement is Fedora CI: >>> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/ci/ >>> >> >> Thanks kamil! yeah, it doesn't make sense to move to Taskotron if it is >> going to be deprecated as well. >> >> >>> I recommend to ask in the CI list: >>> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ci%40lists.fedoraproject.org/ >>> >>> It should be possible for them to provide the infrastructure you need. >>> >> >> Hmm, I am not very sure if we should spend time investigating and setting >> up alternative >> to autocloud unless we have usecases for long run. Fedora Atomic Host Two >> Week releases ends with F29 EOL. > > We could run these tests in openQA pretty easily, I think. The question > is, I guess, whether they will still be of value for Fedora CoreOS. > > I guess to me the real job Autocloud is doing is this: "make sure the > images we intend people to use to run Fedora instances in the cloud > basically work and can do some simple tasks people tend to do with such > images". If the Fedora CoreOS team already is covering this some other > way, or intends to cover it some other way before Fedora CoreOS becomes > a supported thing, then we probably don't need to preserve the > Autocloud tests. If this is not in scope for the Fedora CoreOS > team...we probably still need to do it somewhere else. > > So...has anyone asked the Fedora CoreOS team what the plans here are? > :) We plan to have testing at various stages of the CoreOS build and delivery pipeline. We definitely plan to have FCOS taken care of using the existing kola testing utility [1] that was in use previously for container linux. With that said, one thing that has previously been out of scope for kola is testing instances that aren't provisioned with ignition (i.e. they use cloud-init instead). Today the Fedora Cloud base images are not provisioned using ignition so we'll either need to consider adding ignition as an option there OR consider running automated tests against the Fedora Cloud base images in OpenQA (if that's possible).

On 5/2/19 12:08 AM, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 10:48 PM Dusty Mabe <dusty(a)dustymabe.com&gt; wrote: > > We plan to have testing at various stages of the CoreOS build and delivery > > pipeline. We definitely plan to have FCOS taken care of using the existing > > kola testing utility [1] that was in use previously for container linux. > > > > With that said, one thing that has previously been out of scope for kola is > > testing instances that aren't provisioned with ignition (i.e. they use cloud-init > > instead). Today the Fedora Cloud base images are not provisioned using ignition so > > we'll either need to consider adding ignition as an option there OR consider running > > automated tests against the Fedora Cloud base images in OpenQA (if that's possible). > > > > It's all possible with OpenQA, the tests just have to be written. :) I don't know a whole lot about OpenQA but I'm interested to know: Is it easy to start a VM and attach metadata to it (i.e. support cloud-init)?