Open Stack

On 04/01/17 13:31 -0500, Ian Cordasco wrote:
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tony Breeds <tony at bakeyournoodle.com>
>Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
><openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>, OpenStack Development Mailing
>List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>Date: December 14, 2016 at 00:18:38
>To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
><openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [Release-job-failures] Release of
>openstack/glance failed
>
>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 09:46:54AM -0600, Ian Cordasco wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Andreas Jaeger
>> > Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> > Date: December 12, 2016 at 01:39:17
>> > To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Release-job-failures] Release of openstack/glance
>> failed
>> >
>> > > On 2016-12-12 08:34, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>> > > > On 2016-12-12 06:20, Tony Breeds wrote:
>> > > >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 04:44:18AM +0000, jenkins at openstack.org wrote:
>> > > >>> Build failed.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> - glance-docs-ubuntu-xenial http://logs.openstack.org/38/38f199507aff8bfcaf81ad9ea58ea326224faf5f/release/glance-docs-ubuntu-xenial/de7d73e/
>> > > : FAILURE in 1m 44s
>> > > >>
>> > > >> This boils down to [1] which is a known problem with newer cryptography (and
>> > > >> the interaction with openssl). What I don't understand is how we got there
>> > > >> with constratints working[2]. Perhaps it's the openssl on the release sigining
>> > > >> node is "newer" than general nodepool nodes?
>> > > >
>> > > > glance does not use constraints in venv environment.
>> > > >
>> > > > It can be used since a few months. I'll send a change for master,
>> > >
>> > > I expect this needs backporting to stable branches - stable or glance
>> > > team, please review and backport yourself:
>> > >
>> > > https://review.openstack.org/409642
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you Andreas!
>>
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/410536 is the backport but it's still failing
>> with the same
>> issue with cryptography and openssl[1] :(
>>
>> Yours Tony.
>> [1] http://logs.openstack.org/36/410536/1/check/gate-glance-releasenotes/46c2615/console.html#_2016-12-14_05_13_53_002878
>
>Hi Tony,
>
>So if I understand correctly, presently:
>
>- There is no 11.0.3 tag for glance which is what we planned to use to
>tag liberty-eol
>- There is no 11.0.3 tarball for glance
>- There is no good way to generate a 11.0.3 tarball because of the
>cryptography & openssl conflict
>- There is also no good way to generate a liberty-eol tarsal because
>of that issue.
>
>I believe you asked in another thread (that I cannot locate) if it was
>acceptable to the Glance team to not have an 11.0.3 tarball on
>openstack.org. With Brian on vacation, I'm hoping the other stable
>maintenance cores will chime in. I, for one, (as Release CPL and a
>Stable branch core reviewer) don't think the tarballs are critical for
>Glance. I'm fairly certain that most of the deployment projects use
>the Git repository directly or Distro provided packages (which are
>built from git tags). With that in mind, I don't think this should
>block Glance being EOL'd.
>
>I'm sorry for the delay in my reply. I took a little over a week of
>time off myself.


Yeah, the above sounds reasonable to me, fwiw.

Flavio

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 862 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170105/3698e0f6/attachment.pgp>