On 07/08, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: > Hi, > while dropping fc20 builds from master as announced 2 weeks ago[1] I've seen > that several packages implying ovirt-engine availability on fc21 were > still built on jenkins also if we dropped fc21 support for 3.6 in favor of > fc22. > > Since there's no commitment from integration team and from infrastructure / > CI team to support FC21 I would have liked to drop them. > I've been stopped doing that since it seems there are developers using fc21 > as development environment. > I'd like to understand why. > > I would have understood having developers stuck on fedora 20 for supporting > 3.5 and I totally understand developers already on fedora 22. > But being fedora 21 the only unsupported version I don't see any real reason > for keep wasting CI resources on such distribution. > > Is there any serious motivation for keeping fedora 21 engine related builds > in jenkins? > I may understand keeping vdsm related builds since vdsm is supposed to work > on fc21 also for 3.5 so i've no objection in keeping vdsm and its deps on > fc21 as long as vdsm team supports it.
Totally agree, that will also allow us to remove all the fc21 slaves and replace them with fc22 or el7/el6. There are though a few projecs that still use fc21, but luckilly they use mock already and don't care much of what system has installed. > > Thanks, > -- > Sandro Bonazzola > Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. > See how it works at redhat.com > _______________________________________________ > Infra mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/infra -- David Caro Red Hat S.L. Continuous Integration Engineer - EMEA ENG Virtualization R&D Tel.: +420 532 294 605 Email: [email protected] Web: www.redhat.com RHT Global #: 82-62605
pgpDfrFbCkhSb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
