[openstack-dev] [requirements][mistral][tripleo][horizon][nova][releases] release models for projects tracked in global-requirements.txt

Dougal Matthews dougal at redhat.com
Tue Jun 6 08:21:03 UTC 2017

On 31 May 2017 at 09:35, Renat Akhmerov <renat.akhmerov at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 31 May 2017, 15:08 +0700, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>,
> wrote:
> This has hit us with the mistral and tripleo projects particularly
> (tagged in the title). They disallow pbr-3.0.0 and in the case of
> mistral sqlalchemy updates.
> [mistral]
> mistral - blocking sqlalchemy - milestones
> I wonder why mistral is in requirements. Looks like tripleo-common is
> depending on it ? Could someone shine some light on this ? It might just
> mean mistral-lib is missing a few functions, and switching the release
> model of mistral itself might be overkill ?
> This dependency is currently needed to create custom Mistral actions. It
> was originally not the best architecture and one of the reasons to create
> 'mistral-lib' was in getting rid of dependency on ‘mistral’ by moving all
> that’s needed for creating actions into a lib (plus something else). The
> thing is that the transition is not over and APIs that we put into
> ‘mistral-lib’ are still experimental. The plan is to complete this
> initiative, including docs and needed refactoring, till the end of Pike.
> What possible negative consequences may we have if we switch release model
> to "cycle-with-intermediary”?

I don't fully understand this, but I have one concern that I'll try and

Mistral master is developed against master of other OpenStack projects
(Keystone for auth, and all projects for OpenStack actions). If we were to
release 5.0 today, it would mean that Mistral has a release that is tested
against unreleased Pike but would need to work with Ocata stable releases
(and AFAIK we do not tested Mistral master with Ocata Keystone etc.)

We are very close to breaking the link between tripleo-common and mistral -
I would favour that approach and would prefer a nasty hack to rush that
along rather than changing Mistrals release cycle. I expect to remove
mistral from requirements.txt after the transition anyway.

What needs to happen to remove the dep?
- RDO promotion to get a new mistral-lib release
- After promotion this should start passing
- Port this functionality to tripleo-common
(we were planning on moving this to mistral-extra, but it could go into
tripleo-common as a short term solution)

> Renat Akhmerov
> @Nokia
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170606/b5080158/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list