Open Stack

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 03:16:56PM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> On 4/29/2016 10:28 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:13:42AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
> >>We've just landed the libvirt min to bump us up to 1.2.1 required. It's
> >>probably a good time consider the appropriate bump for Otaca.
> >>
> >>By that time our Ubuntu LTS will be 16.04 (libvirt 1.3.1), RHEL 7.1
> >>(1.2.8). Additionally Debian Jessie has 1.2.9. RHEL 7.2 is at 1.2.17.
> >
> >By the time Ocata is released, I think it'll be valid to ignore
> >RHEL-7.1, as we'll already be onto 7.3 at that time.
> >
> >>My suggestion is we set MIN_LIBVIRT_VERSION to 1.2.8. This will mean
> >>that NUMA support in libvirt (excepting the blacklists) and huge page
> >>support is assumed on x86_64.
> >
> >If we ignore RHEL 7.1, we could go to 1.2.9 which is the min in Jessie.
> 
> Is there a simple reason why ignoring RHEL 7.1 is OK? Honestly I can't
> remember which OpenStack release came out around that time, was it Kilo?

By the time Ocata comes out, we'll be on RHEL-7.3 as latest update
so people really shouldn't be continuing to deploy on RHEL-7.1. IOW,
I think we should be aiming to target $current  & $current-1  RHEL-7
update releases.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|