Open Stack

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 6:27 AM, Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone!
>
> Yesterday on the Ironic midcycle we agreed that we would like to remove
> support for the old bash ramdisk from our code and gate. This, however, pose
> a problem, since we still support Kilo and Liberty. Meaning:

Hi, I just wanted to follow up on this issue after the TripleO meeting today.

By removing support from the code do you mean Ironic and/or DIB?

What if you removed the code from Ironic, but left the element in DIB,
with a note that it only works with stable/liberty and earlier
versions of Ironic?

Could we then:

gate master DIB changes on an Ironic stable/liberty job that uses the
bash ramdisk - this would catch any regressions in DIB that break the
bash ramdisk

gate master DIB changes on an Ironic master job - this is what
gate-tempest-dsvm-ironic-pxe_ssh-dib is already doing (I think).

Is that a valid option, and would it remove the desire for a stable
branch of DIB?

We currently say that DIB is backwards compatible and doesn't use
stable branches. If there's a desire to change that, I think that's
certainly open for discussion. But I don't think we're in a situtation
where it's preventing us from moving forward with removing the bash
ramdisk code from Ironic aiui, but I might be misunderstanding. I also
think that having a stable branch sends the message that master isn't
backwards compatible. If that's not the message, why do we need the
stable branch?

Since currently DIB claims to be backwards compatible, we just need to
leave master backwards compatible with Kilo and Liberty Ironic, which
means not deleting the bash ramdisk element. If Ironic wants to remove
the bash ramdisk support from master, then it ought to be able to do
so.

-- 
-- James Slagle
--