[Linaro-validation] the need for three instances: production, staging and ... dogfood?

[Zygmunt Krynicki]

+1 from me, especially if dogfood has a board along with it.

ZK

On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Andy Doan <andy.doan at linaro.org> wrote:
> On 05/04/2012 12:18 AM, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote:
>>
>> So we'd have:
>>
>>  * production: duh
>>  * staging: this is _solely_ used to determine if changes that have
>>    landed to the trunk of some component are safe to deploy to
>>    production
>>  * dogfood: random hacking
>>
>> I think that potentially we could have some way of bringing up dogfood
>> instances as needed in our private cloud, but tbh for now one on control
>> that we share amongst ourselves in a loose way (i.e. check on IRC before
>> doing stuff with it) would be a useful thing.
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>
>
> I'm +1 on this. I'd been thinking the same thing. I want it really easy to
> try out a change that hasn't yet been merged and "dogfood" fits that
> requirement. I'm not a huge fan of the name, but I can't think of anything
> better and don't want to get stuck bike-shedding.
>
> Along the lines of another thread we had. I think we should have one
> dedicated board for this instance also.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linaro-validation mailing list
> linaro-validation at lists.linaro.org
> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation