Open Stack

On Wed, 2021-01-06 at 09:46 -0300, Victoria Martínez de la Cruz wrote:
> +1
> 
> I don't see good reasons for removing py3.7
based on teh agreed testing runtimes for wallaby 
https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/reference/runtimes/wallaby.rst
there is no requiremetn for project to maintain testing for py 3.7 but that does not
mean the cant elect to test it as an option addtional runtime provided they test teh minium reuiqred
vers which are python 3.6 and 3.8

py 3.7 could be maintined as an optional runtime as we do for python 3.9 but i think part of the motivation
of droping the 3.7 jobs is to conserve ci bandwith in general and ensure we have enough to test with 3.9 were we can.

> 
> Thanks!
> 
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 8:28 AM Radosław Piliszek <
> radoslaw.piliszek at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Sorry for top posting but just a general remark:
> > 
> > Do note Debian 10 is using Python 3.7 and that is what Kolla is testing
> > too.
> > I know Debian is not considered a tested platform but people use it
> > successfully.
> > 
> > My opinion is, therefore, that we should keep 3.7 in classifiers.
> > 
> > -yoctozepto
> > 
> > On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 11:37 AM Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur at redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 10:53 PM Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org>
> > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On 2021-01-05 22:32:58 +0100 (+0100), Pierre Riteau wrote:
> > > > > There have been many patches submitted to drop the Python 3.7
> > > > > classifier from setup.cfg:
> > > > > https://review.opendev.org/q/%2522remove+py37%2522
> > > > > The justification is that Wallaby tested runtimes only include 3.6
> > and 3.8.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Most projects are merging these patches, but I've seen a couple of
> > > > > objections from ironic and horizon:
> > > > > 
> > > > > - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/python-ironicclient/+/769044
> > > > > - https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/horizon/+/769237
> > > > > 
> > > > > What are the thoughts of the TC and of the overall community on this?
> > > > > Should we really drop these classifiers when there are no
> > > > > corresponding CI jobs, even though more Python versions may well be
> > > > > supported?
> > > > 
> > > > My recollection of the many discussions we held was that the runtime
> > > > document would recommend the default python3 available in our
> > > > targeted platforms, but that we would also make a best effort to
> > > > test with the latest python3 available to us at the start of the
> > > > cycle as well. It was suggested more than once that we should test
> > > > all minor versions in between, but this was ruled out based on the
> > > > additional CI resources it would consume for minimal gain. Instead
> > > > we deemed that testing our target version and the latest available
> > > > would give us sufficient confidence that, if those worked, the
> > > > versions in between them were likely fine as well. Based on that, I
> > > > think the versions projects claim to work with should be contiguous
> > > > ranges, not contiguous lists of the exact versions tested (noting
> > > > that those aren't particularly *exact* versions to begin with).
> > > 
> > > 
> > > This is precisely my expectation: if we support 3.6 and 3.8, it's
> > reasonable to suggest we support 3.7. Not supporting it gains us nothing.
> > > 
> > > Dmitry
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Apologies for the lack of references to old discussions, I can
> > > > probably dig some up from the ML and TC meetings several years back
> > > > of folks think it will help inform this further.
> > > > --
> > > > Jeremy Stanley
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
> > > Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
> > > Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael
> > O'Neill
> > 
> >