Open Stack

>We could just state we wont block any activity on the Debian binary
release (this includes tagging, releasing, etc)

I think thats key. If cloud-archive is available before we tag then
fantastic, but I don't want to hold it up because of this. Additionally, we
could do experimental gates for this and potentially a non-voting binary
build gate. I doubt we could do a deploy gate because it will always fail.
You can't run Liberty with our Mitaka code and because of that the gate
would be broken almost immediately after a release.

Artur's patch is being broken up into several patches right now. With the
pace he is going the code should be mergable before the end of the week.

Sam Yaple

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:28 PM, Michał Jastrzębski <inc007 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hey,
>
> So one thing we need to consider there is that currently 3 options we
> support (binary+souce centos and source ubuntu) basically behaves the
> same way - it install current master (or last nights master, which is
> close enough). This one will have fundamentally different behavior,
> and we need to make that clear. This might be documentation issue, but
> I feel we need to make sure that it's there.
>
> Cheers,
> inc0
>
> On 28 December 2015 at 10:16, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com>
> wrote:
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > I have received significant feedback that the lack of Ubuntu binary
> support
> > is a problem for Kolla adoption.  Still, we had nobody to do the work,
> so we
> > held off approving the blueprint.  There were other reasons such as:
> >
> > There is no delorean style repository for debian meaning we would always
> be
> > installing Liberty with our Mitaka tree
> > Given the first problem, a gate may not be feasible – a voting gate would
> > never be feasible
> >
> >
> > Still, I think on balance, the pain here is worth the gain.  We could
> just
> > state we wont block any activity on the Debian binary release (this
> includes
> > tagging, releasing, etc) and mark it as "technical preview" until we sort
> > out the Liberty->Mitaka port in the stable branch.  I'd like other core
> > reviewers thoughts?  I really really want this feature, even if tis tech
> > preview and marked with all kinds of warnings.  Without it Kolla is
> > incomplete.
> >
> > This review is terrible (it needs to be broken up into separate patches)
> but
> > its a huge step in the right direction IMO :)
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/260069/2
> >
> > Comments and thoughts welcome.
> >
> > Regards
> > -stevve
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe:
> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> 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/20151228/86abf2e6/attachment.html>