Open Stack

On 4 January 2014 08:44, Doug Hellmann <doug.hellmann at dreamhost.com> wrote:
>
>
>

> I understand that moving taskflow into oslo would avoid the policy decision
> we have in place to not do symmetric gating on unreleased versions of things
> not "owned" by the OpenStack project. However, I don't know if we want to be
> testing against the git head of libraries no matter where they live. As
> fungi pointed out on IRC, gating against pre-release versions of libraries
> may allow us to reach a state where the software works when installed from
> git, but not from the released packages.

We've certainly hit that situation with nova and neutron where there
were undetected, undocumented issues between trunk server and
last-release client. [TripleO deploys with requirements.txt
requirements, not 'trunk', of each project...] because when we deploy
a released server, at the time we set this up, there was no way to
identify the matching trunk revisions. We could change this now, but
it's been useful to identify unreleased client code being used as a
hard dep in servers - a bad situation.

> It seems safer to gate changes to libraries against the apps' trunk (to
> avoid making backwards-incompatible changes), and then gate changes to the
> apps against the released libraries (to ensure they work with something
> available to be packaged by the distros). There are lots and lots of version
> numbers available to us, so I see no problem with releasing new versions of
> libraries frequently.

+1.

I do see the issue Sean is pointing at, which is that we have to fix
the libraries first and then the things that use them. OTOH thats
normal in the software world, I don't see anything unique about it.

-Rob


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