[openstack-dev] excessively difficult to support both iso8601 0.1.4 and 0.1.8 as deps

Thomas Goirand zigo at debian.org
Tue Nov 26 13:55:14 UTC 2013


I'm sorry to restart this topic.

I don't mind if we upgrade to 0.1.8, but then I will need to have
patches for Havana to support version 0.1.8. Otherwise, it's going to be
very difficult on the packaging side: I will need to upload 0.1.8 for
Icehouse, but then it will break everything else (eg: Havana) that is
currently in Sid.

Was there some patches already for that? If so, please point to them so
that I can cherry-pick them, and carry the patches in the Debian
packages (it doesn't have to be backported to the Havana branch, I'm
fine keeping the patches in the packages, if at least they are identified).

Is there a way that I can grep all commits in Gerrit, to see if there
was such patches committed recently?

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)

On 10/24/2013 09:37 PM, Morgan Fainberg wrote:
> It seems like adopting 0.1.8 is the right approach. If it doesn't work
> with other projects, we should work to help those projects get updated
> to work with it. 
> 
> --Morgan
> 
> On Thursday, October 24, 2013, Zhi Yan Liu wrote:
> 
>     Hi all,
> 
>     Adopt 0.1.8 as iso8601 minimum version:
>     https://review.openstack.org/#/c/53567/
> 
>     zhiyan
> 
>     On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:09 AM, Dolph Mathews
>     <dolph.mathews at gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>     >
>     > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Robert Collins
>     <robertc at robertcollins.net <javascript:;>>
>     > wrote:
>     >>
>     >> On 24 October 2013 07:34, Mark Washenberger
>     >> <mark.washenberger at markwash.net <javascript:;>> wrote:
>     >> > Hi folks!
>     >> >
>     >> > 1) Adopt 0.1.8 as the minimum version in openstack-requirements.
>     >> > 2) Do nothing (i.e. let Glance behavior depend on iso8601 in
>     this way,
>     >> > and
>     >> > just fix the tests so they don't care about these extra formats)
>     >> > 3) Make Glance work with the added formats even if 0.1.4 is
>     installed.
>     >>
>     >> I think we should do (1) because both (2) will permit surprising,
>     >> nonobvious changes in behaviour and (3) is just nasty engineering.
>     >> Alternatively, add a (4) which is (2) with "whinge on startup if
>     0.1.4
>     >> is installed" to make identifying this situation easy.
>     >
>     >
>     > I'm in favor of (1), unless there's a reason why 0.1.8 not viable for
>     > another project or packager, in which case, I've never heard the term
>     > "whinge" before so there should definitely be some of that.
>     >
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> The last thing a new / upgraded deployment wants is something like
>     >> nova, or a third party API script failing in nonobvious ways with no
>     >> breadcrumbs to lead them to 'upgrade iso8601' as an answer.
>     >>
>     >> -Rob
>     >>
>     >> --
>     >> Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com <javascript:;>>
>     >> Distinguished Technologist
>     >> HP Converged Cloud
>     >>
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>     >> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org <javascript:;>
>     >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > --
>     >
>     > -Dolph
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > OpenStack-dev mailing list
>     > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org <javascript:;>
>     > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>     >
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     OpenStack-dev mailing list
>     OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org <javascript:;>
>     http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 




More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list