On 11 September 2015 at 11:26, Tony Breeds <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > In trying to fix a few stable/juno issues we need to release a new version > of ceilometerclient for stable/juno. This email is to try and raise awareness > so that if the proposal is bonkers [1] we can come up with something better. > > This isn't currently possible due to the current caps in juno and kilo. > > The proposed fix is to: > > . update g-r in master (liberty): python-ceilometerclient>=1.2 > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/222386/ > . update g-r in stable/kilo: python-ceilometerclient>=1.1.1,<1.2 > . release a sync of stable/kilo g-r to stable/kilo python-ceilometerclient as > 1.1.1 > . update g-r in stable/juno: python-ceilometerclient<1.1.0,!=1.0.13,!=1.0.14 > . release 1.0.15 with a sync of stable/juno g-r > > The point is, leave 1.0.x for juno, 1.1.x for kilo and >=1.2 for liberty > > This is being tracked as: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-ceilometerclient/+bug/1494516 > > There is a secondary issue if getting the (juno) gate in a shape where we can > actually do all of that. > > Yours Tony. > [1] Bonkers is a recognized technical term right?
That seems like it will work [resists urge to kibbitz on the capping thing]. Perhaps you'd want to add the caps first across all trees, then do the minimum raising in master/liberty. Seems like J might be a little unhappy otherwise. -Rob -- Robert Collins <[email protected]> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
