[openstack-dev] [oslo][pbr] getting 0.11 out the door. Maybe even 1.0

Robert Collins robertc at robertcollins.net
Mon Apr 20 21:44:39 UTC 2015

On 21 April 2015 at 09:27, Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> wrote:
> On 04/20/2015 12:10 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>>> If there's nothing majorly wrong mid-L, I'd like to release 1.0.0 just
>>> to get us into 'ok its stable' mentality.
>> I read that many packages modify the source code of libraries and
>> applications to avoid a dependency to pbr at runtime. What's the
>> status of this issue? Is pbr still used/required to get the version
>> of a package a runtime?
> Yes, a lot. And even worse: in many cases, pbr isn't even declared in the
> requirements.txt, and I had to double check for the facts myself.
>> I'm not sure that it's an issue in pbr itself. Maybe applications
>> should be fixed instead.
> The issue is that nobody used oslo.version, and it vanished. Anyway, pbr is
> actually very small, so I don't think it's an issue.
> On 04/20/2015 02:22 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> I read somewhere that pkg_resources may also be used to get the
>> version.
> That's correct, and I don't understand why we're not using that.
> On 04/20/2015 09:25 PM, Robert Collins wrote:
>> Firstly, pbr has no runtime dep on pip - it doesn't import it. So you
>> don't need pip installed when an installed package uses pbr to get its
>> version.
> Why does requirements.txt of PBR has pip then?

Because if you do 'python setup.py install' in a pbr repo it will
*run* pip today to install requirements.
But this doesn't apply to packagers, because they will be using the overrides.
The packaging of pbr on a distro that doesn't package pip should just
ignore that requirement today.

In future - 0.12 probably - we'll remove that entry from
requirements.txt, but we need to get a release of master done first.

Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list