[cinder] Deprecating driver versions

Erlon Cruz sombrafam at gmail.com
Fri Jun 28 12:09:04 UTC 2019

Hi Gorka,

Em sex, 28 de jun de 2019 às 04:50, Gorka Eguileor <geguileo at redhat.com>

> On 27/06, Erlon Cruz wrote:
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > Driver versions has being a source of a lot of confusions with costumers.
> > Most of our drivers
> > have a version number and history that are updated as the developers adds
> > new fixes and
> > features. Drivers also have a VERSION variable in the version class that
> > should be bumped by
> > developers. The problem with that is:
> >
> >    - sometimes folks from the community just push patches on drivers, and
> > its hard to bump
> >      every vendor version correctly;
> >    - that relies in the human factor to remember adding it, and usually
> > that fails;
> >    - if we create a bugfix and bump the version, the backport to older
> > branches will carry the
> >      version, which will not reflect the correct driver code;
> >
> > So, the solution I'm proposing for this is that we use the Cinder
> > versions[1] and remove all
> > version strings for drivers. Every new release we get a version. For
> stable
> > versions, from time to
> > time the PTL bumps the stable version and we have an accurate ways to
> > describe the code.
> > If we need to backport and send something to the costumer, we can do the
> > backport, poke
> > the PTL, and he will generate another version which can be downloaded on
> > github or via PIP,
> > and present the version to our costumers.
> >
> > So, what are your thought around this? Anyone else has had problems with
> > that? What would
> > be the implications of removing the driver version strings?
> >
> > Erlon
> >
> Hi Erlon,
> I am personally against removing the drivers versions, as I find them
> convenient and think they are good practice.

How do you usually see people using that? And what makes that convenient
for you?
I see that they would  be a good practice if the were properly updated and
reflected the
code status. For example the rbd.py driver. Has used the same version
(1.2.0) since Ocata[1].
I can tell that is the same for most of our drivers.

> A possible solution for the driver versioning is for a driver to
> designate a minor version per OpenStack release and use the patch
> version to track changes.  This way one can always backport a patch and
> will just need to increase the patch version in the backport patch.
> Maybe we can have this formally described in our devref.   We tell
> driver developers they can do whatever they want with the versioning in
> master, but backports must not backport the version as it is and instead
> increase the patch version.

We would again have to rely on developers doing the right thing, and things
will be the same as they are today. The point here is to have a reliable
way to
version the code .

> What do you think?

One thing we could do to still is to link the drivers version to a function
that get the release version. Something like:

    VERSION = utils.get_current_version()

But we could also do a fancy logic that would get the vendor proposed
version and bump it automatically.

    VERSION = '1.2.0'
    VERSION = utils.bump_version()

Where bump_version() would always use the current openstack version to know
what version the driver should be.

> If I remember correctly there are some drivers that only increase the
> version once per release.
> Cheers,
> Gorka.
> > [1] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/cinder.html
> > [2]
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/cinder/blob/master/cinder/volume/drivers/solidfire.py#L237

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20190628/13368b78/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list