Open Stack

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Dugger, Donald D <donald.d.dugger at intel.com
> wrote:

> OK, it looks like the concensus is that we don't try and keep the gantt
> tree in sync with nova instead we:
>
> 1)  Get the current gantt tree to pass unit tests
> 2)  Get gantt to pass integration tests (e.g. get it working as the nova
> scheduler)
> 3)  Modify devstack to optionally use gantt
> 4)  Freeze scheduler changes to nova as we:
>

This should be covered the the standard feature freeze for Icehouse


>       a)  Extract all the changes that were needed to get gantt working
>       b)  Recreate the gantt tree from the current nova tree
>       c)  Apply all the patches from step 4.a
> 5)  Unfreeze scheduler work but now all work is targeted exclusively to
> the gantt tree
>

LGTM, although once we have a working gantt for Icehouse I think we should
have another round of discussion about deprecating nova-scheduler in favor
of gantt.  On I high level that is something I think we all support, but
the devil is in the details.


>
> Note that the current gantt tree has already changed the `nova' directory
> to `gantt' but there are more details for steps 1 and 2 that would be good
> to explicitly list.
>
> --
> Don Dugger
> "Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
> Ph: 303/443-3786
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell Bryant [mailto:rbryant at redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:42 AM
> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [gantt] Sync up patches
>
> On 01/16/2014 11:18 AM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
> >
> > On Jan 16, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Joe Gordon <joe.gordon0 at gmail.com
> > <mailto:joe.gordon0 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Dugger, Donald D
> >> <donald.d.dugger at intel.com <mailto:donald.d.dugger at intel.com>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> My thought was to try and get some parallel effort going, do the
> >> resync as a continuing task as suffer a little ongoing pain versus a
> >> large amount of pain at the end.  Given that the steps for a resync
> >> are the same no matter when we do it waiting until the end is
> >> acceptable.____
> >>
> >> __ __
> >>
> >> From a `just do it' perspective I think we're in violent agreement on
> >> the top level tasks, as long as your step 3, integration testing, is
> >> the same as what I've been calling working functionality, e.g. have
> >> the nova scheduler use the gantt source tree.____
> >>
> >> __ __
> >>
> >> PS:  How I resync.  What I've done is create a list with md5sums of
> >> all the files in nova that we've duplicated in gantt.  I then update
> >> a nova git tree and compare the current md5sums for those files with
> >> my list.  I use format-patch to get the patches from the nova tree
> >> and grep for any patch that applies to a gantt file.  I then use `git
> >> am' to apply those patches to the gantt tree, modifying any of the
> >> patches that are needed.
> >>
> >>
> >> So this sync won't work once we start the nova/gantt rename, so we
> >> need a better approach.
> >>
> >> Syncing the gantt tree with nova sounds like a daunting task.
> >> Perhaps it would be easier if we use the current gantt tree as a test
> >> to see what is involved in getting gantt working, and then redo the
> >> fork after the icehouse feature freeze with the aim of getting the
> >> gantt tree working by the start of juno, so we can have the freeze
> >> nova-scheduler discussion. Syncing nova and gantt during feature
> >> freeze should be significantly easier then doing it now.
> >
> >
> > I would personally just vote for the nuclear approach of freezing nova
> > scheduler and doing work in gantt. If close to icehouse 3 we see that
> > gantt is not going to be ready in time we can selectively backport
> > stuff to nova-scheduler and push gantt to juno.
>
> That sounds OK to me, but I would really just like to see gantt running
> before we freeze nova-scheduler.
>
> Joe's idea might work for this too, which would be something like:
>
> 1) Go through the exercise of making the current thing running using the
> current repo (without keeping it in sync).  This includes devstack
> integration.
>
> 2) Once we see it working and are ready for the nuclear freeze and switch,
> re-generate the repo from nova master and apply everything needed to make
> it work.
>
> --
> Russell Bryant
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140121/a82cce50/attachment.html>