Open Stack

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 11:31:38AM +0000, Neil Jerram wrote:
> Out of interest - for networking-calico - what changes are needed to adapt
> to the new engine facade?

Basically in most cases it is simply do changes like e.g. are done in [1] to use
engine facade api to make db transactions.
Then You should run Your tests, see what will be broken and fix it :)

[1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/networking-midonet/+/770797/3/midonet/neutron/db/gateway_device.py

> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 12:14 PM Akihiro Motoki <amotoki at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 8:07 PM Slawek Kaplonski <skaplons at redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 11:52:59AM +0200, Herve Beraud wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > The main question is, does the previous Victoria version [1] will be
> > > > compatible with the latest neutron changes and with the latest engine
> > > > facade introduced during Wallaby?
> > >
> > > It won't be compatible. Networking-midonet from Victoria will not work
> > properly
> > > with Neutron Wallaby.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Releasing an unfixed engine facade code is useless, so we shouldn't
> > release
> > > > a new version of networking-midonet, because the project code won't be
> > > > compatible with the rest of our projects (AFAIK neutron), unless, the
> > > > previous version will not compatible either, and, unless, not
> > releasing a
> > > > Wallaby version leave the project branch uncut and so leave the
> > > > corresponding series unmaintainable, and so unfixable a posteriori.
> > > >
> > > > If we do not release a new version then we will use a previous version
> > of
> > > > networking-midonet. This version will be the last Victoria version [1].
> > > >
> > > > I suppose that this version (the victoria version) isn't compatible
> > with
> > > > the new facade engine either, isn't it?
> > >
> > > Correct. It's not compatible.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > So release or not release a new version won't solve the facade engine
> > > > problem, isn't?
> > >
> > > Yes.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > You said that neutron evolved and networking-midonet didn't, hence
> > even if
> > > > we release networking-midonet in the current state it will fail too,
> > isn't
> > > > it?
> > >
> > > Also yes :)
> > >
> > > >
> > > > However, releasing a new version and branching on it can give you the
> > > > needed maintenance window to allow you to fix the issue later, when
> > your
> > > > gates will be fixed and then patches backported. git tags are cheap.
> > > >
> > > > We should notice that since Victoria some patches have been merged in
> > > > Wallaby so even if they aren't ground breaking changes they are changes
> > > > that it is worth to release.
> > > >
> > > > From a release point of view I think it's worth it to release a new
> > version
> > > > and to cut Wallaby. We are close to the it's deadline. That will land
> > the
> > > > available delta between Victoria and Wallaby. That will allow to fix
> > the
> > > > engine facade by opening a maintenance window. If the project is still
> > > > lacking maintainers in a few weeks / months, this will allow a more
> > smooth
> > > > deprecation of this one.
> > > >
> > > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Based on Your feedback I agree that we should release now what we have.
> > Even if
> > > it's broken we can then fix it and backport fixes to stable/wallaby
> > branch.
> > >
> > > @Akihiro: are You ok with that too?
> >
> > I was writing another reply and did not notice this mail.
> > While I still have a doubt on releasing the broken code (which we are
> > not sure can be fixed soon or not),
> > I am okay with either decision.
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > https://opendev.org/openstack/releases/src/branch/master/deliverables/victoria/networking-midonet.yaml
> > > >
> > > > Le lun. 29 mars 2021 à 10:32, Slawek Kaplonski <skaplons at redhat.com> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > We have opened release patch for networking-midonet [1] but our
> > concern
> > > > > about
> > > > > that project is that its gate is completly broken since some time
> > thus we
> > > > > don't really know if the project is still working and valid to be
> > released.
> > > > > In Wallaby cycle Neutron for example finished transition to the
> > engine
> > > > > facade,
> > > > > and patch to adjust that in networking-midonet is still opened [2]
> > (and
> > > > > red as
> > > > > there were some unrelated issues with most of the jobs there).
> > > > >
> > > > > In the past we had discussion about networking-midonet project and
> > it's
> > > > > status
> > > > > as the official Neutron stadium project. Then some new folks stepped
> > in to
> > > > > maintain it but now it seems a bit like (again) it lacks of
> > maintainers.
> > > > > I know that it is very late in the cycle now so my question to the
> > TC and
> > > > > release teams is: should we release stable/wallaby with its current
> > state,
> > > > > even if it's broken or should we maybe don't release it at all until
> > its
> > > > > gate
> > > > > will be up and running?
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/781713
> > > > > [2]
> > https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/networking-midonet/+/770797
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Slawek Kaplonski
> > > > > Principal Software Engineer
> > > > > Red Hat
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Hervé Beraud
> > > > Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat
> > > > irc: hberaud
> > > > https://github.com/4383/
> > > > https://twitter.com/4383hberaud
> > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > >
> > > > wsFcBAABCAAQBQJb4AwCCRAHwXRBNkGNegAALSkQAHrotwCiL3VMwDR0vcja10Q+
> > > > Kf31yCutl5bAlS7tOKpPQ9XN4oC0ZSThyNNFVrg8ail0SczHXsC4rOrsPblgGRN+
> > > > RQLoCm2eO1AkB0ubCYLaq0XqSaO+Uk81QxAPkyPCEGT6SRxXr2lhADK0T86kBnMP
> > > > F8RvGolu3EFjlqCVgeOZaR51PqwUlEhZXZuuNKrWZXg/oRiY4811GmnvzmUhgK5G
> > > > 5+f8mUg74hfjDbR2VhjTeaLKp0PhskjOIKY3vqHXofLuaqFDD+WrAy/NgDGvN22g
> > > > glGfj472T3xyHnUzM8ILgAGSghfzZF5Skj2qEeci9cB6K3Hm3osj+PbvfsXE/7Kw
> > > > m/xtm+FjnaywZEv54uCmVIzQsRIm1qJscu20Qw6Q0UiPpDFqD7O6tWSRKdX11UTZ
> > > > hwVQTMh9AKQDBEh2W9nnFi9kzSSNu4OQ1dRMcYHWfd9BEkccezxHwUM4Xyov5Fe0
> > > > qnbfzTB1tYkjU78loMWFaLa00ftSxP/DtQ//iYVyfVNfcCwfDszXLOqlkvGmY1/Y
> > > > F1ON0ONekDZkGJsDoS6QdiUSn8RZ2mHArGEWMV00EV5DCIbCXRvywXV43ckx8Z+3
> > > > B8qUJhBqJ8RS2F+vTs3DTaXqcktgJ4UkhYC2c1gImcPRyGrK9VY0sCT+1iA+wp/O
> > > > v6rDpkeNksZ9fFSyoY2o
> > > > =ECSj
> > > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > >
> > > --
> > > Slawek Kaplonski
> > > Principal Software Engineer
> > > Red Hat
> >
> >

-- 
Slawek Kaplonski
Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20210329/27176a9a/attachment.sig>