Skip to content

Conversation

@steveb
Copy link
Contributor

@steveb steveb commented Sep 24, 2025

This is similar to nova-novncproxy except it includes package openstack-ironic-novncproxy which has existed for 7 months.

Jira: OSPRH-20211

Copy link

@juliakreger juliakreger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/approve

Copy link
Contributor

@karelyatin karelyatin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm label Oct 3, 2025
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Oct 3, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: hjensas, juliakreger, steveb
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from karelyatin. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

This is similar to nova-novncproxy except it includes package
openstack-ironic-novncproxy which has existed for 7 months.

Jira: OSPRH-20211
@steveb steveb force-pushed the ironic-novncproxy branch from c5e406e to d9df922 Compare October 5, 2025 19:34
@steveb steveb requested a review from karelyatin October 5, 2025 19:35
@softwarefactory-project-zuul
Copy link

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/447d1e0bcb004e5fad87d29dfc872405

openstack-meta-content-provider FAILURE in 27m 04s
⚠️ tcib-crc-podified-edpm-baremetal SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-meta-content-provider
⚠️ tcib-podified-multinode-edpm-deployment-crc SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-meta-content-provider

@steveb
Copy link
Contributor Author

steveb commented Oct 9, 2025

It turns out the tcib main branch is building antelope containers. I had assumed that one of the consequences of downstream drawing from the tcib antelope branch would be so that main could build from upstream master packages. @karelyatin do you think we could change the target for the main branch to upstream master?

@vyzigold
Copy link
Contributor

Another thing to be careful about are jobs in rdo-jobs, which build images for all stable images since antelope. I think that the list of images to build for these jobs is also taken from here from the main branch (I'm not an RDO expert, so I could be wrong). So be careful to not damage those jobs.

@karelyatin
Copy link
Contributor

It turns out the tcib main branch is building antelope containers. I had assumed that one of the consequences of downstream drawing from the tcib antelope branch would be so that main could build from upstream master packages. @karelyatin do you think we could change the target for the main branch to upstream master?

@steveb Yes i too think this needs to be changed so main is used to build only master images. I was not fully involved in that previous discussion but likely @hjensas can better confirm this, i will put my understanding here:-

  • tcib repo main branch
    • CI check job to build master containers(currently centos9, centos10 going forward)
    • periodic master pipeline - use tcib/main and build master containers(currently centos9, centos10 going forward)
    • The built/pushed master images are currently only used in some scenarios(like watcher, telemetry currently using these images) and in master periodic jobs. Some manual testing of master container images might be using these too.
  • tcib repo antelope branch
    • CI check job to build antelope containers(centos9)
    • periodic antelope pipeline - use tcib/antelope and build antelope containers(centos9)
    • The built/pushed antelope images are used in any CI job whether it's main or FR branches.
  • Any other operator repo irrespective of main or FR branch
    • Use antelope container images or tcib/antelope branch if building images as part of content provider job

@karelyatin
Copy link
Contributor

Another thing to be careful about are jobs in rdo-jobs, which build images for all stable images since antelope. I think that the list of images to build for these jobs is also taken from here from the main branch (I'm not an RDO expert, so I could be wrong). So be careful to not damage those jobs.

@vyzigold No we not building/pushing images for all the stable branches since antelope . Currently periodic jobs only exist for master and antelope. There may be some effort for in job build for any other release for testing like epoxy but that's just for some tests.
Going forward this can change as needed, like building epoxy/flamingo container images but that should also result into creating/using tcib epoxy/flamingo branches and at that point operators main branch should also be moving to that new stable branch as and when decided.

@vyzigold
Copy link
Contributor

Another thing to be careful about are jobs in rdo-jobs, which build images for all stable images since antelope. I think that the list of images to build for these jobs is also taken from here from the main branch (I'm not an RDO expert, so I could be wrong). So be careful to not damage those jobs.

@vyzigold No we not building/pushing images for all the stable branches since antelope . Currently periodic jobs only exist for master and antelope. There may be some effort for in job build for any other release for testing like epoxy but that's just for some tests. Going forward this can change as needed, like building epoxy/flamingo container images but that should also result into creating/using tcib epoxy/flamingo branches and at that point operators main branch should also be moving to that new stable branch as and when decided.

You're right. I was sure images like https://quay.rdoproject.org/repository/podified--centos9/ exist, but seems like I can't find anything other than antelope and master.

@hjensas
Copy link
Contributor

hjensas commented Oct 14, 2025

It turns out the tcib main branch is building antelope containers. I had assumed that one of the consequences of downstream drawing from the tcib antelope branch would be so that main could build from upstream master packages. @karelyatin do you think we could change the target for the main branch to upstream master?

@steveb Yes i too think this needs to be changed so main is used to build only master images. I was not fully involved in that previous discussion but likely @hjensas can better confirm this, i will put my understanding here:-

* tcib repo main branch
  
  * CI check job to build master containers(currently centos9, centos10 going forward)
  * periodic master pipeline - use tcib/main and build master containers(currently centos9, centos10 going forward)
  * The built/pushed master images are currently only used in some scenarios(like watcher, telemetry currently using these images) and in master periodic jobs. Some manual testing of master container images might be using these too.

* tcib repo antelope branch
  
  * CI check job to build antelope containers(centos9)
  * periodic antelope pipeline - use tcib/antelope and build antelope containers(centos9)
  * The built/pushed antelope images are used in any CI job whether it's main or FR branches.

* Any other operator repo irrespective of main or FR branch
  
  * Use antelope container images or tcib/antelope branch if building images as part of content provider job

Yes, this is what was decided.

@steveb
Copy link
Contributor Author

steveb commented Oct 14, 2025

I have raised a CIX to track this issue https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSPCIX-1078

@steveb
Copy link
Contributor Author

steveb commented Nov 10, 2025

recheck

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants