Dropping python2.7 from diskimage-builder
Heya, I just pushed up: https://review.opendev.org/728889 Drop support for python2 Which drops support for installing diskimage-builder using python2. It doesn’t drop support for in-image python2, that would be a whole different story. It seems that since the two largest DIB users, OpenStack and Zuul, are both now python3 only, it’s a safe move to make. IBM PowerKVM CI is running third-party CI with python2-based tests. We should probably either update those or just drop it? Thoughts? Monty
This might break bifrost stable branches, as bifrost uses DIB from master by default, even for older releases. On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 15:41, Monty Taylor <mordred@inaugust.com> wrote:
Heya,
I just pushed up:
https://review.opendev.org/728889 Drop support for python2
Which drops support for installing diskimage-builder using python2. It doesn’t drop support for in-image python2, that would be a whole different story. It seems that since the two largest DIB users, OpenStack and Zuul, are both now python3 only, it’s a safe move to make.
IBM PowerKVM CI is running third-party CI with python2-based tests. We should probably either update those or just drop it?
Thoughts? Monty
@Pierre, I think we can change stable branches in bifrost to use a specific tag from diskimage-builder and the problem would be solved =) Em seg., 18 de mai. de 2020 às 17:28, Pierre Riteau <pierre@stackhpc.com> escreveu:
This might break bifrost stable branches, as bifrost uses DIB from master by default, even for older releases.
On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 15:41, Monty Taylor <mordred@inaugust.com> wrote:
Heya,
I just pushed up:
https://review.opendev.org/728889 Drop support for python2
Which drops support for installing diskimage-builder using python2. It doesn’t drop support for in-image python2, that would be a whole different story. It seems that since the two largest DIB users, OpenStack and Zuul, are both now python3 only, it’s a safe move to make.
IBM PowerKVM CI is running third-party CI with python2-based tests. We should probably either update those or just drop it?
Thoughts? Monty
-- *Att[]'sIury Gregory Melo Ferreira * *MSc in Computer Science at UFCG* *Part of the puppet-manager-core team in OpenStack* *Software Engineer at Red Hat Czech* *Social*: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iurygregory *E-mail: iurygregory@gmail.com <iurygregory@gmail.com>*
On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 16:56, Iury Gregory <iurygregory@gmail.com> wrote:
@Pierre, I think we can change stable branches in bifrost to use a specific tag from diskimage-builder and the problem would be solved =)
I would urge caution over dropping Python 2 from branchless projects. We tried it for Tenks, and within weeks had created a branch from the last release supporting Python 2 for bug fixes.
Em seg., 18 de mai. de 2020 às 17:28, Pierre Riteau <pierre@stackhpc.com> escreveu:
This might break bifrost stable branches, as bifrost uses DIB from master by default, even for older releases.
On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 15:41, Monty Taylor <mordred@inaugust.com> wrote:
Heya,
I just pushed up:
https://review.opendev.org/728889 Drop support for python2
Which drops support for installing diskimage-builder using python2. It doesn’t drop support for in-image python2, that would be a whole different story. It seems that since the two largest DIB users, OpenStack and Zuul, are both now python3 only, it’s a safe move to make.
IBM PowerKVM CI is running third-party CI with python2-based tests. We should probably either update those or just drop it?
Thoughts? Monty
-- Att[]'s Iury Gregory Melo Ferreira MSc in Computer Science at UFCG Part of the puppet-manager-core team in OpenStack Software Engineer at Red Hat Czech Social: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iurygregory E-mail: iurygregory@gmail.com
As far as I always like the idea of dropping Python 2, I dread more the potential mayhem that this will bring in bifrost stable branches. If this change needs to move forward, we need to be sure of the impact and have a plan in place *before* the change happen. On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 9:20 AM Mark Goddard <mark@stackhpc.com> wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 16:56, Iury Gregory <iurygregory@gmail.com> wrote:
@Pierre, I think we can change stable branches in bifrost to use a specific tag from diskimage-builder and the problem would be solved =)
I would urge caution over dropping Python 2 from branchless projects. We tried it for Tenks, and within weeks had created a branch from the last release supporting Python 2 for bug fixes.
Em seg., 18 de mai. de 2020 às 17:28, Pierre Riteau <pierre@stackhpc.com> escreveu:
This might break bifrost stable branches, as bifrost uses DIB from master by default, even for older releases.
On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 15:41, Monty Taylor <mordred@inaugust.com> wrote:
Heya,
I just pushed up:
https://review.opendev.org/728889 Drop support for python2
Which drops support for installing diskimage-builder using python2. It doesn’t drop support for in-image python2, that would be a whole different story. It seems that since the two largest DIB users, OpenStack and Zuul, are both now python3 only, it’s a safe move to make.
IBM PowerKVM CI is running third-party CI with python2-based tests. We should probably either update those or just drop it?
Thoughts? Monty
-- Att[]'s Iury Gregory Melo Ferreira MSc in Computer Science at UFCG Part of the puppet-manager-core team in OpenStack Software Engineer at Red Hat Czech Social: https://www.linkedin.com/in/iurygregory E-mail: iurygregory@gmail.com
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 08:13:26AM +0100, Mark Goddard wrote:
I would urge caution over dropping Python 2 from branchless projects. We tried it for Tenks, and within weeks had created a branch from the last release supporting Python 2 for bug fixes.
I certainly get that but it has to happen one day. The gate is broken because we do use requirements from OpenStack and they have moved on to be Python 3 only. Since dib is currently on version 2, perhaps we should tag as version 3 and then leave ourselves the option of a branch from that point, if we find we actually need it? [1] https://review.opendev.org/728889
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:24 PM Ian Wienand <iwienand@redhat.com> wrote:
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 08:13:26AM +0100, Mark Goddard wrote:
I would urge caution over dropping Python 2 from branchless projects. We tried it for Tenks, and within weeks had created a branch from the last release supporting Python 2 for bug fixes.
I certainly get that but it has to happen one day. The gate is broken because we do use requirements from OpenStack and they have moved on to be Python 3 only.
Since dib is currently on version 2, perhaps we should tag as version 3 and then leave ourselves the option of a branch from that point, if we find we actually need it?
I think this is the most reasonable action to take.
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 08:22:42AM +1000, Ian Wienand wrote:
Since dib is currently on version 2, perhaps we should tag as version 3 and then leave ourselves the option of a branch from that point, if we find we actually need it?
After a bit of discussion, I think [1] is ready; it keeps minimal Python 3.5 support to keep inline with Zuul/nodepool by not using constraints to test under 3.5, but then includes py36 onwards jobs as usual. Looking at bifrost, they seem to install from Zuul checkout, so just adding a branch-override tag for the last 2.0 (2.37 I guess) to the required-projects on stable branches should do it. johnsom confirmed it would be OK for octavia. Since [1] has a few dependencies anyway, I think it's probably best to force-merge [2,3,4,5] around the gate failures (they'd had review from clarkb and otherwise passing) which fixes some bits about installing the focal kernel and will mean that the last 2.X does not have any known issues building images up until the focal release. -i [1] https://review.opendev.org/728889 [2] https://review.opendev.org/727049 [3] https://review.opendev.org/727050 [4] https://review.opendev.org/726996 [5] https://review.opendev.org/725752
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 02:22:48PM +1000, Ian Wienand wrote:
Since [1] has a few dependencies anyway, I think it's probably best to force-merge [2,3,4,5] around the gate failures (they'd had review from clarkb and otherwise passing) which fixes some bits about installing the focal kernel and will mean that the last 2.X does not have any known issues building images up until the focal release.
After a few back and forths, 2.38.0 is intended to be the last dib release and doesn't have any known issues building up to focal on x86-64 and arm64, the rpm distros and gentoo are also in good shape. I'll leave this a few days and then merge the python-3 only changes and tag as 3.0.0 Thanks, -i
This will likely cause pain for the Octavia team (given the extended maintenance stable branches), but I would rather do this now, early in the release cycle, than wait. Just my $0.02. Michael On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 6:32 AM Monty Taylor <mordred@inaugust.com> wrote:
Heya,
I just pushed up:
https://review.opendev.org/728889 Drop support for python2
Which drops support for installing diskimage-builder using python2. It doesn’t drop support for in-image python2, that would be a whole different story. It seems that since the two largest DIB users, OpenStack and Zuul, are both now python3 only, it’s a safe move to make.
IBM PowerKVM CI is running third-party CI with python2-based tests. We should probably either update those or just drop it?
Thoughts? Monty _______________________________________________ Zuul-discuss mailing list Zuul-discuss@lists.zuul-ci.org http://lists.zuul-ci.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/zuul-discuss
participants (8)
-
Ian Wienand
-
Iury Gregory
-
Julia Kreger
-
Mark Goddard
-
Michael Johnson
-
Monty Taylor
-
Pierre Riteau
-
Riccardo Pittau