Open Stack

I agree with Ryan and Thomas to a point.  The reality is that the cadence
of development in OpenStack is sufficiently more speedy than deployment
targets.  We've seen RedHat, Ubuntu, and Debian have to go out of their
ways to try and support that.  We should at the very least be doing some of
the bare minimum to ease that pain.  However we should have a hard cut off
for supported upgrade paths.

That being said.  This happened:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPnehDhGa14

-Matt


On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Ryan Lane <rlane at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 8:29 AM, Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It seems that by policy, upgrading directly from Essex to Grizzly isn't
>> supported. There's simply no SQL upgrade scripts for it.
>>
>> Though, I think this is a huge mistake. Currently, in Debian, we have
>> Essex in Wheezy and SID, and Grizzly in Experimental. There's no room
>> for Folsom anymore. I already have some bug reports that it isn't
>> possible to upgrade from SID to Experimental.
>>
>> As much as I understand, the only problem is the SQL upgrade scripts.
>> What would it take to have the Essex to Folsom upgrade scripts re-added
>> to Grizzly? Is this something I will have to maintain myself (which
>> would be quite annoying), or could the policy change, and the scripts
>> added upstream?
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
> I don't understand why sql upgrade scripts from any release would ever be
> removed. It should be possible to do a data migration from any older
> version of OpenStack to the current version.
>
> - Ryan
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130501/a2d3208f/attachment.html>