Open Stack

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Joshua Harlow <harlowja at fastmail.com> wrote:
> Okie, the following reviews are up:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/307461 (oslo.concurrency)
> https://review.openstack.org/307463 (oslo.cache)
> https://review.openstack.org/307464 (oslo.privsep)
> https://review.openstack.org/307466 (oslo.middleware)
> https://review.openstack.org/307467 (oslo.log)
> https://review.openstack.org/307468 (oslo.db)
> https://review.openstack.org/307469 (oslo.versionedobjects)
> https://review.openstack.org/307470 (oslo.service)
> https://review.openstack.org/307471 (oslo.reports)
>
> Do note that the following have a dependency on babel but do not depend on
> oslo.il8n:
>
> tooz
> oslo.context
> oslo.serialization
> debtcollector
>
> Should we do anything about the above four?

Josh,

Babel is mainly for translations:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Translations

So we can remove them

-- Dims

>
> -Josh
>
> Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>
>> Excerpts from Davanum Srinivas (dims)'s message of 2016-04-18 14:27:48
>> -0400:
>>>
>>> Josh,
>>>
>>> So Andreas and i talked a bit, it seems like NONE of the oslo.* libs
>>> except oslo.i18n needs a direct dependency on Babel. So we should yank
>>> them all out and bump major versions
>>>
>>> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-infra/latest.log.html#t2016-04-18T11:58:10
>>
>>
>> I don't think we need to raise major versions to drop a dependency. We
>> only need to do that for backwards-incompatible changes, and this
>> doesn't seem to be one.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dims
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 1:42 PM, Joshua Harlow<harlowja at fastmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04/17/2016 09:15 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Oslo folks, Andreas and others,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Over the weekend oslo.log 3.4.0 was released. This broke keystone CI
>>>>>> jobs [2], even though the 3.4.0 was not specified in upper-constraints
>>>>>> as keystone jobs were not honoring the upper-constraints.txt, so we
>>>>>> fixed it in [3].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So the first big problem after [3] was that several tox targets do not
>>>>>> inject u-c and hence fail, so in [3] we also added install_commands
>>>>>> for testenv:releasenotes and testenv:cover, based on the pattern set
>>>>>> in Nova's tox.ini [4]. That was still not enough and we had to add an
>>>>>> entry in keystone's requirements.txt for Babel even though it was not
>>>>>> there before (and hence pulling in latest Babel from somewhere).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So Here are the questions:
>>>>>> 1) Is there anyone working to fix all tox CI jobs to honor upper
>>>>>> constraints?
>>>>>> 2) Why do we need Babel in oslo.log's requirements.txt?
>>>>>> 3) Can we remove Babel from all requirements.txt and
>>>>>> test-requirements.txt and leave them in just tox.ini when needed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note that there was nothing wrong either in oslo.log itself it
>>>>>> published a release with what was in global-requirements.txt, nor in
>>>>>> keystone, which has traditionally not run with constraints on. Just
>>>>>> the combination of situations with Babel going bad broke at least
>>>>>> keystone.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did anyone else see other jobs break? Please respond!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Dims
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/ygyxpjpbhlbz3q5d
>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://logs.openstack.org/86/249486/32/check/gate-keystone-python34-db/29ace4f/console.html#_2016-04-17_04_31_51_138
>>>>>> [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/306846/
>>>>>> [4] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova/tree/tox.ini
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think what happened is:
>>>>> 1) oslo.log indirectly requires Babel
>>>>> 2) requirements blacklists Babel 2.3.x
>>>>> 3) keystone has new requirements included and thus fails
>>>>>
>>>>> The problem here is that oslo.log requires olso.i18n which requires
>>>>> Babel. And if oslo.i18n would have had a release with the blacklisting
>>>>> of Babel 2.3.x, this wouldn't have happened. So, I propose to release
>>>>> oslo.i18n.
>>>>>
>>>>> Babel 2.3.4 which fixes the known problems might be out soon as well -
>>>>> and if that does not introduce regressions, this will self-heal,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ok, so which option should we go with here?
>>>>
>>>> I'm ok with releasing olso.i18n or Babel 2.3.4 (when is this release
>>>> happening, soon? like soon soon?)
>>>>
>>>>> Andreas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims