Re: CI/CD and testnets proposal for discussion tomorrow

Casey Kuhlman


Can you elaborate on the proposed direction of travel regarding testnets? Is the idea that HL will run a CE instance of Gitlab in some infrastructure or that will be the instance? If the latter where are the runners going to live infrastructure wise? If in's infrastructure that would be fine for CI from our (Burrow's) perspective, but won't be ideal for testnets due to CI timeouts. 

For burrow we have extensive helm charts, gitlab CI configs, and testnet / stressnet mechanisms built already which we operate from Monax's self hosted Gitlab in our Kubernetes cluster. So in general this direction of travel gets a ++ from me. If we (burrow maintainers) have access to running testnets / stressnets in a Kubernetes cluster that's not Monax's via Gitlab CI we would be very happy campers indeed.

Thanks in advance,

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019, 22:12 Shawn Amundson <amundson@...> wrote:
Sounds cool. Perhaps we could do an evaluation period were projects can evaluate using the gitlab setup to determine if it is sufficient to replace existing tooling, with the intent to report back on the experience to the TSC. Is Ursa already using this setup? How much effort would it take from HL staff to do such a evaluation period?


On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 4:04 PM Dave Huseby <dhuseby@...> wrote:

I put together a summary with details on what I propose we do to rework the HL CI/CD pipeline. The proposal can be found here:

As usual, comment there, discuss here.

David Huseby
Security Maven, Hyperledger
The Linux Foundation

Join to automatically receive all group messages.