On 20 April 2016 at 05:44, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Michał Jastrzębski's message of 2016-04-18 10:29:20 -0700: >> What I meant is if you have liberty Nova and liberty Cinder, and you >> want to upgrade Nova to Mitaka, you also upgrade Oslo to Mitaka and >> Cinder which was liberty either needs to be upgraded or is broken, >> therefore during upgrade you need to do cinder and nova at the same >> time. DB can be snapshotted for rollbacks. >> > > If we're breaking backward compatibility even across one release, that > is a bug. You should be able to run Liberty components with Mitaka > Libraries. Unfortunately, the testing matrix for all of the combinations > is huge and nobody is suggesting we try to solve that equation.
Sadly no: we don't make that guarantee today. I think we should, but there isn't consensus - at least amongst the folk that have been debating the backwards compat for libraries spec - that it is actually *desirable*. Please, come to the session and help build consensus in Austin :). > However, to the point of distros: partial upgrades is not the model distro > packages work under. They upgrade what they can, whether they're a rolling > release, or 7 year cycle LTS's. When the operator says "give me the new > release", the packages that can be upgraded, will be upgraded. And if > Mitaka Nova is depending on something outside the upper constraints in > another package on the system, the distro will just hold Nova back. And presumably all of OpenStack. -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hpe.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
