Open Stack

Excerpts from Renat Akhmerov's message of 2016-05-18 11:07:29 +0700:
> 
> > On 17 May 2016, at 21:50, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Excerpts from Renat Akhmerov's message of 2016-05-17 19:10:55 +0700:
> >> Team,
> >> 
> >> Our stable/mitaka branch is now broken by oslo.messaging 5.0.0. Global requirements for stable/mitaka has oslo.messaging>=4.0.0 so it can fetch 5.0.0.
> >> 
> >> Just reminding that it breaks us because we intentionally modified RPCDispatcher like in [1]. It was needed for “at-least-once” delivery. In master we already agreed to remove that hack and work towards having a decent solution (there are options). The patch is [2]. But we need to handle it in mitaka somehow.
> >> 
> >> Options I see:
> >> Constrain oslo.messaging in global-requirements.txt for stable/mitaka with 4.6.1. Hard to do since it requires wide cross-project coordination.
> >> Remove that hack in stable/mitaka as we did with master. It may be bad because this was wanted very much by some of the users
> >> 
> >> Not sure what else we can do.
> > 
> > You could set up your test jobs to use the upper-constraints.txt file in
> > the requirements repo.
> 
> Yes, it’s an option. I’m just thinking from a regular user perspective. There will be a lot of people who don’t know about upper-constraints.txt and they will be stumbling on it just using our requirements.txt. My question here is: is upper-constraints.txt something that’s officially promoted and should be used by everyone or it’s mostly introduced for our internal OpenStack gating system?

Anyone installing from PyPI should use the constraints list. Anyone
installing from system packages won't need it.

Doug

> 
> > What was the outcome of the discussion about adding the at-least-once
> > semantics to oslo.messaging?
> 
> 
> No outcome yet, we’re still discussing. I expect that more people join the thread since some stakeholders were off after the summit.
> 
> Renat Akhmerov
> @Nokia