On Mon, 1 Jun 2020 at 15:37, Pierre-Yves Chibon <pingou@pingoured.fr> wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 03:18:58PM +0200, Clement Verna wrote:
>    On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 14:27, Pierre-Yves Chibon <[1]pingou@pingoured.fr>
>    wrote:
>      Good Morning Everyone,
>      I know this question has already been raised a few times, but I think we
>      should
>      raise it once more: what do we see as future for loopabull?
>      It is currently triggered on 4 topics (3 from prod and 1 from stg) to do
>      basically
>      three actions:
>      - Flag commit successfully built in koji, in other words it adds these
>      flags
>        to dist-git:
>      [2]https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mingw-filesystem/c/717f2a929bd25b62a0427e8e5c3792a0939dbfce
>      - Flag when the Fedora CI start testing a PR
>      - Flag when the Fedora CI finished testing a PR (and thus reports
>      Pass/Fail)
>      Upstream released yesterday a 0.0.7 release which brings supports for
>      fedora-messaging (contributed by your servitor).
>      Looking at the code, it should be python3 compatible, but it doesn't say
>      specifically in the setup.py and I honestly don't remember if I've
>      tested that
>      or not.
>      The package has been orphaned in Fedora for over 10 months and has thus
>      been
>      retired.
>      I've had a chat with upstream yesterday and they are still interested in
>      the
>      project but more as a pet project and their time is just like the rest
>      of us,
>      limited for pet projects these days.
>      That being said the code base is really quite small and involves
>      technologies
>      we're already using in other places (python-pika, celery, rabbitmq,
>      ansible...)
>      so there isn't really anything new there.
>      One of its limitation currently is with secrets, how to pass/specify
>      them.
>      This is something we could circumvent via ansible-vault or so, but it
>      needs a
>      little investigation.
>      I basically see three ways forward with this:
>      - We continue with loopabull and we need to check its python3 support,
>      how to
>        deal with secrets, if we can get it to run in openshift & so on.
>      - We look for something else, similar. The requirements being:
>        - Run a task when seeing a message in our message bus
>        - Handle secrets
>        - Scalable up/down
>        - Runnable in openshift is a bonus
>        - Preferably in a language we can debug (python++, potentially rust)
>      - We write something that fits our needs and requirements
>    There is a PR[0] in fedora-messaging to add a 'run' callback that would
>    let you execute any command, I think that might be a nice solution and I
>    think it would meet most of the requirements.
>    [0] - [3]https://github.com/fedora-infra/fedora-messaging/pull/163

Isn't that the equivalent of having us write a custom fedora-messaging consumer
for each task we want to automate?

Yes but without all the boilerplate needed for each consumer.
In a way I like this, it's simple(r), really straight forward, constraint and
self-contained. There is no risk that a previous task prevents a following one
to be executed.
On the other hand it also means that if we move to, say fed-messaging, in the
future, we will have to convert more consumers.

If that's a trade off we're willing to live with, then I'm ok with it as well.

I don't have a strong opinion here :-)

infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org