Open Stack

Dmitry, Igor,

> Very important thing is that CentOS 7.1 which master node is based now
> don't get updates any longer.

If you are using "fixed" release you must be ready that you won't get
any updates. So with CentOS 7.2 the problem still the same.

However, let's wait for Fuel PTL decision. I only shared my POV:
that's not a critical feature, and taking into account the risks of
regression - I'd prefer to do not accept it in 9.0.

Regards,
Igor

On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Igor Marnat <imarnat at mirantis.com> wrote:
> Igor,
> please note that this is pretty much not like update of master node which we
> had in 8.0. This is minor _update_ of CentOS from 7.1 to 7.2 which team
> tested for more than 2 months already.
>
> We don't expect it to require any additional efforts from core or qa team.
>
> Very important thing is that CentOS 7.1 which master node is based now don't
> get updates any longer. Updates are only provided for CentOS 7.2.
>
> So we'll have to switch CentOS 7.1 to CentOS 7.2 anyways.
>
> We can do it now for more or less free, later in release cycle for higher
> risk and QA efforts and after the release for 2x price because of additional
> QA cycle we'll need to pass through.
>
>
>
> Regards,
> Igor Marnat
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:57 PM, Dmitry Teselkin <dteselkin at mirantis.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Igor,
>>
>> Postponing this till Fuel 10 means we have to elaborate a plan to do such
>> upgrade for Fuel 9 after the release - the underlying system will not get
>> updated on it's own, and the security issues will not close themselves. The
>> problem here is that such upgrade of deployed master node requires a lot of
>> QA work also.
>>
>> Since we are not going to update package we build on our own (they still
>> targeted 7.1) switching master node base to CentOS-72 is not that dangerous
>> as it seems.
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnitsky at mirantis.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Dmitry,
>>>
>>> No offence, but I rather against that exception. We have too many
>>> things to do in Mitaka, and moving to CentOS 7.2 means
>>>
>>> * extra effort from core team
>>> * extra effort from qa team
>>>
>>> Moreover, it might block development by introducing unpredictable
>>> regressions. Remember 8.0? So I think it'd be better to reduce risk of
>>> regressions that affects so many developers by postponing CentOS 7.2
>>> till Fuel 10.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Igor
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Dmitry Teselkin <dteselkin at mirantis.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > I'd like to ask for a feature freeze exception for switching to
>>> > CentOS-7.2
>>> > feature [0].
>>> >
>>> > CentOS-7.2 ISO's have been tested periodically since the beginning of
>>> > the
>>> > year, and all major issues were addressed / fixed at the moment. During
>>> > the
>>> > last weekend I've made 70 BVT runs to verify that the  solution [2] for
>>> > the
>>> > last issue - e1000 transmit unit hangs works. And it works, 0 tests of
>>> > 35
>>> > failed [3].
>>> >
>>> > Benefits of switching to CentOS-7.2 are quite obvious - we will return
>>> > to
>>> > latest supported CentOS release, will fix a lot of bugs / security
>>> > issues
>>> > [4] and will make further updates easier.
>>> >
>>> > Risk of regression still exists, but it's quite low, 35 successful BVTs
>>> > can't be wrong.
>>> >
>>> > To finish that feature the following should be done:
>>> > * review and merge e1000 workaround [2]
>>> > * review and merge spec [0]
>>> > * review and merge request that switches build CI to CentOS-7.2 [5]
>>> >
>>> > I expect the last day it could be done is March, 4.
>>> >
>>> > [0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280338/
>>> > [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1526544
>>> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/285306/
>>> > [3] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/r.1c4cfee8185326d6922d6c9321404350
>>> > [4] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/r.a7fe0b575d891ed81206765fa5be6630
>>> > [5] https://review.fuel-infra.org/#/c/17400/
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Dmitry Teselkin
>>> > Mirantis
>>> > http://www.mirantis.com
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > __________________________________________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Dmitry Teselkin
>> Mirantis
>> http://www.mirantis.com
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>