Open Stack

On 03/29/2014 01:07 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 03/28/2014 12:50 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>> Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>> Julien Danjou wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Mar 27 2014, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> -happybase>=0.4,<=0.6
>>>>> +happybase>=0.8
>>>>
>>>> Good for me, and Ceilometer is the only one using happybase as far
>>>> as I know so that shouldn't be a problem.
>>>
>>> OK so I would be fine with "happybase>=0.4,!=0.6,!=0.7" as it
>>> allows 0.8 to be run without adversely impacting downstreams who
>>> don't have it available.
>>
>> Actually that should be "happybase>=0.4,!=0.7" since 0.6 was allowed
>> before.
>
> The review has comments about 0.7 being the version in Debian and
> Ubuntu right now https://review.openstack.org/#/c/82438/.
>
> Which is problematic, as that's a version that's specifically being
> called out by the ceilometer team as not useable. Do we know why, and
> if it can be worked around?
>
> 	-Sean

Sean,

I have uploaded version 0.8 into Debian experimental. This is what
should be looked into for Icehouse (and not Sid): packages from Debian
experimental will be uploaded into Debian Sid the day of the release.

Now, I can upload happybase 0.8 to Sid if this doesn't break Havana.

On 03/29/2014 05:01 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> So how did Ceilometer get into this situation? Because the ceilometer
> requirements are happybase>=0.4,<=0.6

I don't think it was like this since the beginning. I did it because of:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=730368

I could go back to the history, and check when we did the >=0.4,<=0.6,
requirement, but without even looking, I'd bet gold against chocolate
that this happened *AFTER* I uploaded 0.7 (because upstream author of
happybase asked for an update, and I did it the same day).

Anyway, since it seems there's a consensus on this:

"happybase>=0.5,!=0.7"

that's what I did here:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/82438/

Please approve it.

Thomas