Open Stack

On 03/11/2014 04:04 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 03/04/2014 12:39 PM, Steven Hardy wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As some of you know, I've been working on the instance-users blueprint[1].
>>
>> This blueprint implementation requires three new items to be added to the
>> heat.conf, or some resources (those which create keystone users) will not
>> work:
>>
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/73978/
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76035/
>>
>> So on upgrade, the deployer must create a keystone domain and domain-admin
>> user, add the details to heat.conf, as already been done in devstack[2].
>>
>> The changes requried for this to work have already landed in devstack, but
>> it was discussed to day and Clint suggested this may be unacceptable
>> upgrade behavior - I'm not sure so looking for guidance/comments.
>>
>> My plan was/is:
>> - Make devstack work
>> - Talk to tripleo folks to assist in any transition (what prompted this
>>    discussion)
>> - Document the upgrade requirements in the Icehouse release notes so the
>>    wider community can upgrade from Havana.
>> - Try to give a heads-up to those maintaining downstream heat deployment
>>    tools (e.g stackforge/puppet-heat) that some tweaks will be required for
>>    Icehouse.
>>
>> However some have suggested there may be an openstack-wide policy which
>> requires peoples old config files to continue working indefinitely on
>> upgrade between versions - is this right?  If so where is it documented?
> This is basically enforced in code in grenade, the language for this
> actually got lost in the project requirements discussion in the TC, I'll
> bring that back in the post graduation requirements discussion we're
> having again.
>
> The issue is - Heat still doesn't materially participate in grenade.
> Heat is substantially far behind the other integrated projects in it's
> integration with the upstream testing. Only monday did we finally start
> gating on a real unit of work for Heat (the heat-slow jobs). If I was
> letter grading projects right now on upstream testing I'd give Nova an
> A, Neutron a C (still no full run, no working grenade), and Heat a D.
Sean,

I agree the Heat community hasn't done a bang-up job of getting 
integrated with Tempest.  We only have 50 functional tests implemented.  
The community clearly needs to do more and provide better functional 
coverage with Heat.

It is inappropriate to say "Only monday did we finally start gating" 
because that was a huge move in the right direction.  It took alot of 
effort and should not be so easily dismissed.  Clearly the community, 
and especially the core developers, are making an effort.  Keep in mind 
we have to balance upstream development work, answering user questions, 
staying on top of a 5 page review queue, keeping relationships and track 
of the various integrated projects which are consuming Heat as a 
building block, plus all of the demands of our day jobs.

We just don't have enough bandwidth on the core team to tackle writing 
all of the tempest test cases ourselves.  We have made an effort to 
distribute this work to the overall heat community via wishlist bugs in 
Heat which several new folks have picked up.  I hope to see our coverage 
improve over time, especially with more advanced scenario tests through 
this effort.

Regards
-steve

> So in short. Heat did the wrong thing. You should be able to use your
> configs from the last release. This is what all the mature projects in
> OpenStack do. In the event that you *have* to make a change like that it
> requires an UpgradeImpact tag in the commit. And those should be limited
> really aggressively. This is the whole point of the deprecation cycle.
>
> 	-Sean
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140311/c44d6a12/attachment.html>