+1 for volunteers to step up. -- Dims
On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Doug Hellmann <d...@doughellmann.com> wrote: > Excerpts from John Dickinson's message of 2016-08-09 11:14:57 -0700: >> 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. >> >> --John > > As we said at the summit, when someone changes the requirements sync job > to deal with overlapping and compatible ranges, this will be fine. We > don't currently have anyone working on that, but since we agreed we > would do it if there are any volunteers they should talk with the > requirements team about how to get started. > > In the mean time, projects following the global requirements process > are still expected to sync the patches created by the bot. > > Doug > >> >> On 9 Aug 2016, at 9:24, Ian Cordasco wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> >> > Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> > Date: August 9, 2016 at 11:21:47 >> > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] History lesson please >> > >> >> On 08/09/2016 11:25 AM, Matthew Thode wrote: >> >>> On 08/09/2016 10:22 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: >> >>>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>> From: Matthew Thode >> >>>> Reply: prometheanf...@gentoo.org , OpenStack Development >> >> Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> >>>> Date: August 9, 2016 at 09:53:53 >> >>>> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> >>>> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements] History lesson please >> >>>> >> >>>>> One of the things on our todo list is to test the 'lower-constraints' >> >>>>> to >> >>>>> make sure they still work with the head of branch. >> >>>> >> >>>> That's not sufficient. You need to find versions in between the lowest >> >>>> tested version >> >> and the current version to also make sure you don't end up with breakage. >> >> You might have >> >> somepackage that has a lower version of 2.0.1 and a current constraint of >> >> 2.12.3. You >> >> might even have a blacklist of versions in between those two versions, >> >> but you still need >> >> other versions to ensure that things in between those continue to work. >> >>>> >> >>>> THe tiniest of accidental incompatibilities can cause some of the most >> >>>> bizarre bugs. >> >>>> >> >>>> -- >> >>>> Ian Cordasco >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> I'm aware of this, but this would be a good start. >> >> >> >> And, more importantly, assuming that testing is only valid if it covers >> >> every scenario, sets the bar at entirely the wrong place. >> >> >> >> A lower bound test would eliminate some of the worst fiction we've got. >> >> Testing is never 100%. With a complex system like OpenStack, it's >> >> probably not even 1% (of configs matrix for sure). But picking some >> >> interesting representative scenarios and seeing that it's not completely >> >> busted is worth while. >> > >> > Right. I'm not advocating for testing every released version of a >> > dependency. In general, it's good to test versions that have *triggered* >> > changes though. If upgrading from 2.3.0 to 2.4.1 caused you to need to fix >> > something, test something earlier than 2.4.1, and 2.4.1, and then >> > something later. That's what I'm advocating for. >> > >> > -- >> > Ian Cordasco >> > >> > >> > __________________________________________________________________________ >> > 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 > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 -- Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims __________________________________________________________________________ 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
