Need core reviewers for sqlalchemy-migrate
zigo at debian.org
Tue Feb 23 20:22:15 UTC 2021
On 2/23/21 8:25 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2021-02-23 12:39:47 -0600 (-0600), Ben Nemec wrote:
>> On 2/23/21 11:42 AM, Jay Bryant wrote:
>>> On 2/23/2021 11:11 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>>>> I may have things mixed up now, but I thought I was told a few
>>>> years ago now that sqlalchemy-migrate was deprecated and that
>>>> projects should be migrating to alembic now.
>>> This was my understanding as well. Has that position changed?
>> Quite the contrary, oslo.db just deprecated migrate support:
>> This came up in the keystone meeting a few weeks ago because the
>> deprecation broke their test jobs. Unfortunately, from looking at
>> other projects' migration patches it doesn't appear to be trivial
> For a bit of history, the SQLAM maintainers decided to abandon the
> project, so it was forked into StackForge (remember StackForge?) by
> https://review.openstack.org/36723 in mid-2013. The commit message
> at the time suggested, "The overall project plan is to transition to
> alembic." I guess 8 years isn't enough warning to get that to
Though there was the plan to move to Alembic, as mentioned in this
thread, the transition may not be easy.
That original author happened to be a Debian developer, and I was the
one telling the list about the situation. And that's how I became a core
reviewer of the project, even if I don't even know how to write a
program that would SQLAM.
We still have Nova, Cinder, Heat, and probably others that still use
SQLAM, so it's probably not the best idea to abandon it just yet... :)
Therefore, I'm asking again: someone must step up to maintain SQLAM.
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
More information about the openstack-discuss