Open Stack

That's good to know, thank you, Vladimir, Dmitry.

--
Best regards,
Oleg Gelbukh

On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Vladimir Kozhukalov <
vkozhukalov at mirantis.com> wrote:

> In fact, we (I and Dmitry) are on the same page of how to merge these two
> features (Centos7 and Docker removal). We agreed that Dmitry's feature is
> much more complicated and of higher priority. So, Centos 7 should be merged
> first and then I'll rebase my patches (mostly supervisor -> systemd).
>
>
>
>
>
> Vladimir Kozhukalov
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnitsky at mirantis.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hey Dmitry,
>>
>> Thank you for your effort. I believe it's a huge step forward that
>> opens number of possibilities.
>>
>> > Every container runs systemd as PID 1 process instead of
>> > supervisord or application / daemon.
>>
>> Taking into account that we're going to drop Docker containers, I
>> think it was unnecessary complication of your work.
>>
>> Please sync-up with Vladimir Kozhukalov, he's working on getting rid
>> of containers.
>>
>> > Every service inside a container is a systemd unit. Container build
>> > procedure was modified, scripts setup.sh and start.sh were introduced
>> > to be running during building and configuring phases respectively.
>>
>> Ditto. :)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Igor
>>
>> P.S: I wrote the mail and forgot to press "send" button. It looks like
>> Oleg is already pointed out that I wanted to.
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Oleg Gelbukh <ogelbukh at mirantis.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Please, take into account the plan to drop the containerization of Fuel
>> > services:
>> >
>> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/248814/
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Dmitry Teselkin <
>> dteselkin at mirantis.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> We've been working for some time on bringing CentOS-7 to master node,
>> >> and now is the time to share and discuss the transition plan.
>> >>
>> >> First of all, what have been changed:
>> >> * Master node itself runs on CentOS-7. Since all the containers share
>> >>   the same repo as master node they all have been migrated to CentOS-7
>> >>   too. Every container runs systemd as PID 1 process instead of
>> >>   supervisord or application / daemon.
>> >> * Every service inside a container is a systemd unit. Container build
>> >>   procedure was modified, scripts setup.sh and start.sh were introduced
>> >>   to be running during building and configuring phases respectively.
>> >>   The main reason for this was the fact that many puppet manifests use
>> >>   service management commands that require systemd daemon running. This
>> >>   also allowed to simplify Dockerfiles by removing all actions to
>> >>   setup.sh file.
>> >> * We managed to find some bugs in various parts that were fixed too.
>> >> * Bootstrap image is also CentOS-7 based. It was updated to better
>> >>   support it - some services converted to systemd units and fixes to
>> >>   support new network naming schema were made.
>> >> * ISO build procedure was updated to reflect changes in CentOS-7
>> >>   distribution and to support changes in docker build procedure.
>> >> * Many applications was updated (puppet, docker, openstack
>> >>   components).
>> >> * Docker containers moved to LVM volume to improve performance and get
>> >>   rid of annoying warning messages during master node deployment.
>> >>   bootstrap_admin_node.sh script was updated to fix some deployment
>> >>   issues (e.g. dracut behavior when there are multiple network
>> >>   interfaces available) and simplified by removing outdated
>> >>   functionality. It was also converted to a "run once" logon script
>> >>   instead of being run as a service, primarily because of a way it's
>> >>   used.
>> >>
>> >> As you can see there are a lot of changes were made. Some of them might
>> >> be merged into current master if surrounded by conditionals to be
>> >> compatible with current master node, but some of them simply can't.
>> >>
>> >> To simplify the code review process we've splitted CRs that we were
>> >> using during active development to  a set of smaller CRs and assigned
>> >> the same topic centos7-master-nod to all of them [0].
>> >>
>> >> So, here is the plan:
>> >> * We will put a mark 'Breaks' in every commit message indicating if the
>> >>   CR is compatible with current master node. E.g. 'Breaks: centos-6'
>> >>   means it can't be merged without breaking things, but 'Breaks:
>> >>   nothing' means it OK to merge.
>> >> * All the CRs should be reviewed, regardless of their 'breaks' label,
>> >>   and voted. We will not merge breaking CRs accidentally, only those
>> >>   that are safe will be merged.
>> >> * While code review is in progress we will work on passing our custom
>> >>   ISO BVT and scale lab tests. When these tests pass - we will run
>> >>   swarm on top of this custom ISO.
>> >> * In the meantime our QA infrastructure will be updated to support
>> >>   CentOS-7 master node - it should be compatible in most cases,
>> >>   however, there are some places that are not. We plan to make changes
>> >>   compatible with current ISO.
>> >> * As soon as ISO becomes good enough we should take a deep breath and
>> >>   turn the switch by merging all the changes that will bring CentOS-7
>> >>   to master branch (and break CentOS-6 version). This step requires
>> >>   all repositories involved to be frozen for small period of time, and
>> >>   that's why a merge freeze might be called. Immediately after all the
>> >>   changes are merged we will build new ISO and run reduced set of swarm
>> >>   tests. If the results are acceptable we will go on with CentOS-7. If
>> >>   not - we will revert breaking changes.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> [0]
>> >>
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+topic:centos7-master-node,n,z
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Dmitry Teselkin
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> >> 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
>> >
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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/20151124/3aea4a0b/attachment.html>