Excerpts from Hayes, Graham's message of 2016-08-09 18:54:57 +0000: > On 09/08/2016 19:41, John Dickinson wrote: > > > > > > On 9 Aug 2016, at 11:33, Ian Cordasco wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: John Dickinson <m...@not.mn> > >> Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > >> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > >> Date: August 9, 2016 at 13:17:08 > >> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] History lesson please > >> > >>> I'd like to advocate for *not* raising minimum versions very often. Every > >>> time some OpenStack > >>> project raises minimum versions, this change is propagated to all > >>> projects, and that > >>> puts extra burden on anyone who is maintaining packages and dependencies > >>> in their own > >>> deployment. If one project needs a new feature introduced in version 32, > >>> but another > >>> project claims compatibility with >=28, that's ok. There's no need for > >>> the second project > >>> to raise the minimum version when there isn't a conflict. (This is the > >>> position I advocated > >>> for at the Austin summit.) > >>> > >>> Yes, I know that currently we don't test every possible version > >>> permutation. Yes, I know > >>> that doing that is hard. I'm not ignoring that. > >> > >> Right. So with the current set-up, where these requirements are propogated > >> to every project, how do projects express their own minimum version > >> requirement? > >> > >> Let's assume someone is maintaining their own packages and dependencies. > >> If (for example) Glance requires a minimum version of Routes and Nova has > >> a minimum requirement newer than Glance's, they're not coinstallable > >> (which was the original goal of the requirements team). What you're asking > >> for ends up being "Don't rely on new features in a dependency". If > >> OpenStack drops the illusion of coinstallability that ends up being fine. > >> I don't think anyone wants to drop that though. > > > > In that case, they are still co-installable, because the nova minimum > > satisfies both. > > But then packagers are going to have to do the work anyway, as it will > have in effect raised the minimum version of routes for Glance, and thus > need a new package. > > It might not make a difference to deployers / packagers who only deploy > one project from OpenStack, but they are in the minority - having a > known good minimum for requirements helps deployers who have multiple > services to deploy.
We've tried to be consistent in telling packagers to use the versions listed in upper-constraints.txt unless there is an absolute need to use something else. Those are the versions we test, and therefore the versions we claim to support right now. Doug __________________________________________________________________________ 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
