Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-12-15 Thread Igor Kalnitsky 
Folks,

I want to bring this up again. There were no progress since last
Oleg's mail, and we must decide. It's good that we still have
"2015.1.0-8.0" version while OpenStack uses "Liberty" name for
versions.

Let's decide which name to use, file a bug and finally resolve it.

- Igor

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Oleg Gelbukh  wrote:
> Igor, it is interesting that you mention backward compatibility in this
> context.
>
> I can see lots of code in Nailgun that checks for release version to
> enable/disable features that were added or removed more than 2 releases
> before [1] [2] [3] (there's a lot more).
>
> What should we do about that code? I believe we could 'safely' delete it. It
> will make our code base much more compact and supportable without even
> decoupling serializers, etc. Is my assumption correct, or I just missing
> something?
>
> This will also help to switch to another scheme of versioning of releases,
> since there will be much less places where those version scheme is
> hardcoded.
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/release.py#L142-L145
> [2]
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/orchestrator/deployment_serializers.py#L554-L555
> [3]
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/serializers/node.py#L124-L126
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Oleg Gelbukh
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
> wrote:
>>
>> Oleg,
>>
>> I think we can remove this function for new releases and keep them
>> only for backward compatibility with previous ones. Why not? If
>> there's a way to do things better let's do them better. :)
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> wrote:
>> > In short, because of this:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/db/sqlalchemy/models/release.py#L74-L99
>> >
>> > Unless we use dashed 2-component version where OpenStack version comes
>> > first, followed by version of Fuel, this will break creation of a
>> > cluster
>> > with given release.
>> >
>> > -Oleg
>> >
>> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
>> >  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Why can't we use 'liberty' without 8.0?
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 at 19:33, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to be
>> >>> 'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist in
>> >>> the
>> >>> code and allows for smooth transition.
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Best regards,
>> >>> Oleg Gelbukh
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>> >>> 
>> >>> wrote:
>> 
>>  Oleg,
>> 
>>  Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)
>> 
>>  - Igor
>> 
>>  On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>>  wrote:
>>  > Igor,
>>  >
>>  > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases are
>>  > dropped.
>>  > [1] [2]
>>  >
>>  > [1]
>>  >
>>  > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
>>  > [2]
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
>>  >
>>  > --
>>  > Best regards,
>>  > Oleg Gelbukh
>>  >
>>  > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>>  > 
>>  > wrote:
>>  >>
>>  >> Oleg,
>>  >>
>>  >> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they
>>  >> planning
>>  >> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
>>  >> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of
>>  >> something
>>  >> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to
>>  >> drop
>>  >> it?
>>  >>
>>  >> Thanks,
>>  >> Igor
>>  >>
>>  >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh
>>  >> 
>>  >> wrote:
>>  >> > Igor,
>>  >> >
>>  >> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in
>>  >> > OpenStack. So
>>  >> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in
>>  >> > Libery,
>>  >> > Nova
>>  >> > has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have
>>  >> > version
>>  >> > 12.0.1,
>>  >> > while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and
>>  >> > 11.0.1
>>  >> > for
>>  >> > minor
>>  >> > release.
>>  >> >
>>  >> > The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used
>>  >> > in
>>  >> > several
>>  >> > places, the most important being installation path of the
>>  >> > fuel-library.
>>  >> > We
>>  >> > won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to
>>  >> > understand
>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-12-15 Thread Dmitry Klenov 
Hi folks,

I would propose to keep current versioning schema until fuel release
schedule is fully aligned with OpenStack releases. AFAIK it is expected to
happen since 9.0. After it we can switch to OpenStack version names.

BR,
Dmitry.

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I want to bring this up again. There were no progress since last
> Oleg's mail, and we must decide. It's good that we still have
> "2015.1.0-8.0" version while OpenStack uses "Liberty" name for
> versions.
>
> Let's decide which name to use, file a bug and finally resolve it.
>
> - Igor
>
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> wrote:
> > Igor, it is interesting that you mention backward compatibility in this
> > context.
> >
> > I can see lots of code in Nailgun that checks for release version to
> > enable/disable features that were added or removed more than 2 releases
> > before [1] [2] [3] (there's a lot more).
> >
> > What should we do about that code? I believe we could 'safely' delete
> it. It
> > will make our code base much more compact and supportable without even
> > decoupling serializers, etc. Is my assumption correct, or I just missing
> > something?
> >
> > This will also help to switch to another scheme of versioning of
> releases,
> > since there will be much less places where those version scheme is
> > hardcoded.
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/release.py#L142-L145
> > [2]
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/orchestrator/deployment_serializers.py#L554-L555
> > [3]
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/serializers/node.py#L124-L126
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Oleg Gelbukh
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Igor Kalnitsky  >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Oleg,
> >>
> >> I think we can remove this function for new releases and keep them
> >> only for backward compatibility with previous ones. Why not? If
> >> there's a way to do things better let's do them better. :)
> >>
> >> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> >> wrote:
> >> > In short, because of this:
> >> >
> >> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/db/sqlalchemy/models/release.py#L74-L99
> >> >
> >> > Unless we use dashed 2-component version where OpenStack version comes
> >> > first, followed by version of Fuel, this will break creation of a
> >> > cluster
> >> > with given release.
> >> >
> >> > -Oleg
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
> >> >  wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Why can't we use 'liberty' without 8.0?
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 at 19:33, Oleg Gelbukh 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to be
> >> >>> 'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist
> in
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> code and allows for smooth transition.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --
> >> >>> Best regards,
> >> >>> Oleg Gelbukh
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> 
> >>  Oleg,
> >> 
> >>  Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)
> >> 
> >>  - Igor
> >> 
> >>  On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh <
> ogelb...@mirantis.com>
> >>  wrote:
> >>  > Igor,
> >>  >
> >>  > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases
> are
> >>  > dropped.
> >>  > [1] [2]
> >>  >
> >>  > [1]
> >>  >
> >>  >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
> >>  > [2]
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  >
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
> >>  >
> >>  > --
> >>  > Best regards,
> >>  > Oleg Gelbukh
> >>  >
> >>  > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
> >>  > 
> >>  > wrote:
> >>  >>
> >>  >> Oleg,
> >>  >>
> >>  >> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they
> >>  >> planning
> >>  >> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
> >>  >> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of
> >>  >> something
> >>  >> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to
> >>  >> drop
> >>  >> it?
> >>  >>
> >>  >> Thanks,
> >>  >> Igor
> >>  >>
> >>  >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh
> >>  >> 
> >>  >> wrote:
> >>  >> > Igor,
> >>  >> >
> >>  >> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in
> >>  >> > OpenStack. So
> >>  >> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in
> >>  >> > Libery,
> >>  >> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-12-15 Thread Oleg Gelbukh 
I have a few changes in review [0] that implement a plan outlined in the
bug [1] for seamless merge of the new versioning schema (liberty-8.0). With
those changes merged in order, we should be OK without changing ISO in Fuel
infra.

I also have version of ISO with green BVT that incorporates changes listed
above. It could replace the current ISO in Fuel infra any time we're ready
for it. Currently I'm trying to get green system tests on it as well.

We just need to decide on what path we want to take.

[0]
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+branch:master+topic:bug/1503663,n,z
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1503663/comments/10

--
Best regards,
Oleg Gelbukh

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 8:58 PM Dmitry Klenov  wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I would propose to keep current versioning schema until fuel release
> schedule is fully aligned with OpenStack releases. AFAIK it is expected to
> happen since 9.0. After it we can switch to OpenStack version names.
>
> BR,
> Dmitry.
>
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 8:41 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
> wrote:
>
>> Folks,
>>
>> I want to bring this up again. There were no progress since last
>> Oleg's mail, and we must decide. It's good that we still have
>> "2015.1.0-8.0" version while OpenStack uses "Liberty" name for
>> versions.
>>
>> Let's decide which name to use, file a bug and finally resolve it.
>>
>> - Igor
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 10:23 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> wrote:
>> > Igor, it is interesting that you mention backward compatibility in this
>> > context.
>> >
>> > I can see lots of code in Nailgun that checks for release version to
>> > enable/disable features that were added or removed more than 2 releases
>> > before [1] [2] [3] (there's a lot more).
>> >
>> > What should we do about that code? I believe we could 'safely' delete
>> it. It
>> > will make our code base much more compact and supportable without even
>> > decoupling serializers, etc. Is my assumption correct, or I just missing
>> > something?
>> >
>> > This will also help to switch to another scheme of versioning of
>> releases,
>> > since there will be much less places where those version scheme is
>> > hardcoded.
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/release.py#L142-L145
>> > [2]
>> >
>> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/orchestrator/deployment_serializers.py#L554-L555
>> > [3]
>> >
>> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/serializers/node.py#L124-L126
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <
>> ikalnit...@mirantis.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Oleg,
>> >>
>> >> I think we can remove this function for new releases and keep them
>> >> only for backward compatibility with previous ones. Why not? If
>> >> there's a way to do things better let's do them better. :)
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > In short, because of this:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/db/sqlalchemy/models/release.py#L74-L99
>> >> >
>> >> > Unless we use dashed 2-component version where OpenStack version
>> comes
>> >> > first, followed by version of Fuel, this will break creation of a
>> >> > cluster
>> >> > with given release.
>> >> >
>> >> > -Oleg
>> >> >
>> >> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
>> >> >  wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Why can't we use 'liberty' without 8.0?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 at 19:33, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to
>> be
>> >> >>> 'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist
>> in
>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> code and allows for smooth transition.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> --
>> >> >>> Best regards,
>> >> >>> Oleg Gelbukh
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>> >> >>> 
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> 
>> >>  Oleg,
>> >> 
>> >>  Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)
>> >> 
>> >>  - Igor
>> >> 
>> >>  On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh <
>> ogelb...@mirantis.com>
>> >>  wrote:
>> >>  > Igor,
>> >>  >
>> >>  > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases
>> are
>> >>  > dropped.
>> >>  > [1] [2]
>> >>  >
>> >>  > [1]
>> >>  >
>> >>  >
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
>> >>  > [2]
>> >>  >
>> >>  >
>> >>  >
>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
>> >>  >
>> >>  > --
>> >>  > Best regards,
>> >>  > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >>  >
>> >>  > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>> >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-22 Thread Oleg Gelbukh 
Igor, it is interesting that you mention backward compatibility in this
context.

I can see lots of code in Nailgun that checks for release version to
enable/disable features that were added or removed more than 2 releases
before [1] [2] [3] (there's a lot more).

What should we do about that code? I believe we could 'safely' delete it.
It will make our code base much more compact and supportable without even
decoupling serializers, etc. Is my assumption correct, or I just missing
something?

This will also help to switch to another scheme of versioning of releases,
since there will be much less places where those version scheme is
hardcoded.

[1]
https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/release.py#L142-L145
[2]
https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/orchestrator/deployment_serializers.py#L554-L555
[3]
https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/objects/serializers/node.py#L124-L126

--
Best regards,
Oleg Gelbukh

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
wrote:

> Oleg,
>
> I think we can remove this function for new releases and keep them
> only for backward compatibility with previous ones. Why not? If
> there's a way to do things better let's do them better. :)
>
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> wrote:
> > In short, because of this:
> >
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/db/sqlalchemy/models/release.py#L74-L99
> >
> > Unless we use dashed 2-component version where OpenStack version comes
> > first, followed by version of Fuel, this will break creation of a cluster
> > with given release.
> >
> > -Oleg
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
> >  wrote:
> >>
> >> Why can't we use 'liberty' without 8.0?
> >>
> >> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 at 19:33, Oleg Gelbukh 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to be
> >>> 'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist in
> the
> >>> code and allows for smooth transition.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Best regards,
> >>> Oleg Gelbukh
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <
> ikalnit...@mirantis.com>
> >>> wrote:
> 
>  Oleg,
> 
>  Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)
> 
>  - Igor
> 
>  On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>  wrote:
>  > Igor,
>  >
>  > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases are
>  > dropped.
>  > [1] [2]
>  >
>  > [1]
>  >
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
>  > [2]
>  >
>  >
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
>  >
>  > --
>  > Best regards,
>  > Oleg Gelbukh
>  >
>  > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>  > 
>  > wrote:
>  >>
>  >> Oleg,
>  >>
>  >> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they
> planning
>  >> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
>  >> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of something
>  >> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to
> drop
>  >> it?
>  >>
>  >> Thanks,
>  >> Igor
>  >>
>  >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh <
> ogelb...@mirantis.com>
>  >> wrote:
>  >> > Igor,
>  >> >
>  >> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in
>  >> > OpenStack. So
>  >> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in
>  >> > Libery,
>  >> > Nova
>  >> > has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have
>  >> > version
>  >> > 12.0.1,
>  >> > while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1
>  >> > for
>  >> > minor
>  >> > release.
>  >> >
>  >> > The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used
> in
>  >> > several
>  >> > places, the most important being installation path of the
>  >> > fuel-library.
>  >> > We
>  >> > won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to
>  >> > understand
>  >> > how we are going to handle that.
>  >> >
>  >> > My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack
> version
>  >> > as a
>  >> > part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library
>  >> > will be
>  >> > '/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.
>  >> >
>  >> > --
>  >> > Best regards,
>  >> > Oleg Gelbukh
>  >> >
>  >> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>  >> > 
>  >> > wrote:
>  >> >>
>  >> >> Hey Oleg,
>  >> >>
>  >> >> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor
>

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-19 Thread Igor Kalnitsky 
Oleg,

I think we can remove this function for new releases and keep them
only for backward compatibility with previous ones. Why not? If
there's a way to do things better let's do them better. :)

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 11:50 PM, Oleg Gelbukh  wrote:
> In short, because of this:
> https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/db/sqlalchemy/models/release.py#L74-L99
>
> Unless we use dashed 2-component version where OpenStack version comes
> first, followed by version of Fuel, this will break creation of a cluster
> with given release.
>
> -Oleg
>
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk
>  wrote:
>>
>> Why can't we use 'liberty' without 8.0?
>>
>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 at 19:33, Oleg Gelbukh  wrote:
>>>
>>> After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to be
>>> 'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist in the
>>> code and allows for smooth transition.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>> Oleg Gelbukh
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
>>> wrote:

 Oleg,

 Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)

 - Igor

 On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
 wrote:
 > Igor,
 >
 > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases are
 > dropped.
 > [1] [2]
 >
 > [1]
 > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
 > [2]
 >
 > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
 >
 > --
 > Best regards,
 > Oleg Gelbukh
 >
 > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
 > 
 > wrote:
 >>
 >> Oleg,
 >>
 >> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they planning
 >> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
 >> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of something
 >> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to drop
 >> it?
 >>
 >> Thanks,
 >> Igor
 >>
 >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
 >> wrote:
 >> > Igor,
 >> >
 >> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in
 >> > OpenStack. So
 >> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in
 >> > Libery,
 >> > Nova
 >> > has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have
 >> > version
 >> > 12.0.1,
 >> > while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1
 >> > for
 >> > minor
 >> > release.
 >> >
 >> > The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used in
 >> > several
 >> > places, the most important being installation path of the
 >> > fuel-library.
 >> > We
 >> > won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to
 >> > understand
 >> > how we are going to handle that.
 >> >
 >> > My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack version
 >> > as a
 >> > part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library
 >> > will be
 >> > '/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.
 >> >
 >> > --
 >> > Best regards,
 >> > Oleg Gelbukh
 >> >
 >> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
 >> > 
 >> > wrote:
 >> >>
 >> >> Hey Oleg,
 >> >>
 >> >> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases
 >> >> of
 >> >> *stable* branch will be versioned?
 >> >>
 >> >> Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?
 >> >>
 >> >> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
 >> >>
 >> >> Thanks,
 >> >> Igor
 >> >>
 >> >>
 >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh
 >> >> 
 >> >> wrote:
 >> >> > Hello,
 >> >> >
 >> >> > I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to
 >> >> > have in
 >> >> > Fuel
 >> >> > regarding versioning of OpenStack.
 >> >> >
 >> >> > As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was
 >> >> > decided
 >> >> > that
 >> >> > since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project
 >> >> > changes.
 >> >> > Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects,
 >> >> > nor the
 >> >> > coordinated release is going to have unified number [1].
 >> >> > Individual
 >> >> > projects
 >> >> > will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release
 >> >> > itself
 >> >> > seems to be dropped.
 >> >> >
 >> >> > However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use
 >> >> > year-based
 >> >> > version of
 >> >> > OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this?

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-17 Thread Oleg Gelbukh 
After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to be
'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist in the
code and allows for smooth transition.

--
Best regards,
Oleg Gelbukh

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
wrote:

> Oleg,
>
> Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)
>
> - Igor
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> wrote:
> > Igor,
> >
> > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases are
> dropped.
> > [1] [2]
> >
> > [1]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
> > [2]
> >
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Oleg Gelbukh
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky  >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Oleg,
> >>
> >> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they planning
> >> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
> >> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of something
> >> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to drop
> >> it?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Igor
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> >> wrote:
> >> > Igor,
> >> >
> >> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in OpenStack.
> So
> >> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in Libery,
> >> > Nova
> >> > has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have version
> >> > 12.0.1,
> >> > while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1 for
> >> > minor
> >> > release.
> >> >
> >> > The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used in
> >> > several
> >> > places, the most important being installation path of the
> fuel-library.
> >> > We
> >> > won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to
> >> > understand
> >> > how we are going to handle that.
> >> >
> >> > My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack version
> as a
> >> > part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library will
> be
> >> > '/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best regards,
> >> > Oleg Gelbukh
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
> >> > 
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hey Oleg,
> >> >>
> >> >> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases of
> >> >> *stable* branch will be versioned?
> >> >>
> >> >> Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?
> >> >>
> >> >> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Igor
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh  >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > Hello,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to have
> in
> >> >> > Fuel
> >> >> > regarding versioning of OpenStack.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was
> decided
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project
> >> >> > changes.
> >> >> > Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects, nor
> the
> >> >> > coordinated release is going to have unified number [1]. Individual
> >> >> > projects
> >> >> > will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release
> >> >> > itself
> >> >> > seems to be dropped.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based
> >> >> > version of
> >> >> > OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we
> have
> >> >> > openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come up
> >> >> > with
> >> >> > something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version
> >> >> > component
> >> >> > from
> >> >> > our versioning schema for good?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
> >> >> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/
> >> >> >
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > Best regards,
> >> >> > Oleg Gelbukh
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> __
> >> >> > 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
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
>

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-17 Thread Sergii Golovatiuk 
Why can't we use 'liberty' without 8.0?
On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 at 19:33, Oleg Gelbukh  wrote:

> After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to be
> 'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist in the
> code and allows for smooth transition.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Oleg Gelbukh
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
> wrote:
>
>> Oleg,
>>
>> Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)
>>
>> - Igor
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> wrote:
>> > Igor,
>> >
>> > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases are
>> dropped.
>> > [1] [2]
>> >
>> > [1]
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
>> > [2]
>> >
>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <
>> ikalnit...@mirantis.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Oleg,
>> >>
>> >> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they planning
>> >> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
>> >> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of something
>> >> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to drop
>> >> it?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Igor
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Igor,
>> >> >
>> >> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in OpenStack.
>> So
>> >> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in Libery,
>> >> > Nova
>> >> > has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have version
>> >> > 12.0.1,
>> >> > while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1 for
>> >> > minor
>> >> > release.
>> >> >
>> >> > The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used in
>> >> > several
>> >> > places, the most important being installation path of the
>> fuel-library.
>> >> > We
>> >> > won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to
>> >> > understand
>> >> > how we are going to handle that.
>> >> >
>> >> > My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack version
>> as a
>> >> > part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library will
>> be
>> >> > '/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Best regards,
>> >> > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>> >> > 
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hey Oleg,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases
>> of
>> >> >> *stable* branch will be versioned?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> Igor
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh <
>> ogelb...@mirantis.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > Hello,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to have
>> in
>> >> >> > Fuel
>> >> >> > regarding versioning of OpenStack.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was
>> decided
>> >> >> > that
>> >> >> > since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project
>> >> >> > changes.
>> >> >> > Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects, nor
>> the
>> >> >> > coordinated release is going to have unified number [1].
>> Individual
>> >> >> > projects
>> >> >> > will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release
>> >> >> > itself
>> >> >> > seems to be dropped.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based
>> >> >> > version of
>> >> >> > OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we
>> have
>> >> >> > openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come up
>> >> >> > with
>> >> >> > something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version
>> >> >> > component
>> >> >> > from
>> >> >> > our versioning schema for good?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>> >> >> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --
>> >> >> > Best regards,
>> >> >> > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> __
>> >> >> > 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-17 Thread Oleg Gelbukh 
In short, because of this:
https://github.com/openstack/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/nailgun/db/sqlalchemy/models/release.py#L74-L99

Unless we use dashed 2-component version where OpenStack version comes
first, followed by version of Fuel, this will break creation of a cluster
with given release.

-Oleg

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Sergii Golovatiuk <
sgolovat...@mirantis.com> wrote:

> Why can't we use 'liberty' without 8.0?
>
> On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 at 19:33, Oleg Gelbukh  wrote:
>
>> After closer look, the only viable option in closer term seems to be
>> 'liberty-8.0' version. It does not to break comparisons that exist in the
>> code and allows for smooth transition.
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Oleg Gelbukh
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Oleg,
>>>
>>> Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)
>>>
>>> - Igor
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>>> wrote:
>>> > Igor,
>>> >
>>> > Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases are
>>> dropped.
>>> > [1] [2]
>>> >
>>> > [1]
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
>>> > [2]
>>> >
>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Best regards,
>>> > Oleg Gelbukh
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <
>>> ikalnit...@mirantis.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Oleg,
>>> >>
>>> >> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they planning
>>> >> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
>>> >> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of something
>>> >> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to drop
>>> >> it?
>>> >>
>>> >> Thanks,
>>> >> Igor
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > Igor,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in
>>> OpenStack. So
>>> >> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in
>>> Libery,
>>> >> > Nova
>>> >> > has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have version
>>> >> > 12.0.1,
>>> >> > while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1
>>> for
>>> >> > minor
>>> >> > release.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used in
>>> >> > several
>>> >> > places, the most important being installation path of the
>>> fuel-library.
>>> >> > We
>>> >> > won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to
>>> >> > understand
>>> >> > how we are going to handle that.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack version
>>> as a
>>> >> > part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library
>>> will be
>>> >> > '/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Best regards,
>>> >> > Oleg Gelbukh
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>>> >> > 
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Hey Oleg,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases
>>> of
>>> >> >> *stable* branch will be versioned?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Thanks,
>>> >> >> Igor
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh <
>>> ogelb...@mirantis.com>
>>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >> >> > Hello,
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to
>>> have in
>>> >> >> > Fuel
>>> >> >> > regarding versioning of OpenStack.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was
>>> decided
>>> >> >> > that
>>> >> >> > since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project
>>> >> >> > changes.
>>> >> >> > Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects,
>>> nor the
>>> >> >> > coordinated release is going to have unified number [1].
>>> Individual
>>> >> >> > projects
>>> >> >> > will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release
>>> >> >> > itself
>>> >> >> > seems to be dropped.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based
>>> >> >> > version of
>>> >> >> > OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we
>>> have
>>> >> >> > openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come
>>> up
>>> >> >> > with
>>> >> >> > something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version
>>> >> >> > component
>>> >> >> > from
>>> >> >> > our versioning schema for good?
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>>> >> >> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/
>>> >> >> >
>>> >> >> > --
>>> >> >> > Best regards,

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-16 Thread Igor Kalnitsky 
Hey Oleg,

I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases of
*stable* branch will be versioned?

Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?

[1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html

Thanks,
Igor


On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to have in Fuel
> regarding versioning of OpenStack.
>
> As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was decided that
> since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project changes.
> Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects, nor the
> coordinated release is going to have unified number [1]. Individual projects
> will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release itself
> seems to be dropped.
>
> However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based version of
> OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we have
> openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come up with
> something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version component from
> our versioning schema for good?
>
> Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.
>
> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Oleg Gelbukh
>
> __
> 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-16 Thread Oleg Gelbukh 
Igor,

The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in OpenStack. So
every component will be versioned separately, for example, in Libery, Nova
has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have version
12.0.1, while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1
for minor release.

The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used in several
places, the most important being installation path of the fuel-library. We
won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to understand
how we are going to handle that.

My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack version as a
part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library will be
'/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.

--
Best regards,
Oleg Gelbukh

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
wrote:

> Hey Oleg,
>
> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases of
> *stable* branch will be versioned?
>
> Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?
>
> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>
> Thanks,
> Igor
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to have in Fuel
> > regarding versioning of OpenStack.
> >
> > As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was decided that
> > since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project changes.
> > Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects, nor the
> > coordinated release is going to have unified number [1]. Individual
> projects
> > will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release itself
> > seems to be dropped.
> >
> > However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based
> version of
> > OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we have
> > openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come up with
> > something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version component
> from
> > our versioning schema for good?
> >
> > Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.
> >
> > [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Oleg Gelbukh
> >
> >
> __
> > 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
>
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-16 Thread Igor Kalnitsky 
Oleg,

Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they planning
to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of something
like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to drop
it?

Thanks,
Igor

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh  wrote:
> Igor,
>
> The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in OpenStack. So
> every component will be versioned separately, for example, in Libery, Nova
> has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have version 12.0.1,
> while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1 for minor
> release.
>
> The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used in several
> places, the most important being installation path of the fuel-library. We
> won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to understand
> how we are going to handle that.
>
> My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack version as a
> part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library will be
> '/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Oleg Gelbukh
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Oleg,
>>
>> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases of
>> *stable* branch will be versioned?
>>
>> Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?
>>
>> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Igor
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to have in
>> > Fuel
>> > regarding versioning of OpenStack.
>> >
>> > As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was decided
>> > that
>> > since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project changes.
>> > Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects, nor the
>> > coordinated release is going to have unified number [1]. Individual
>> > projects
>> > will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release itself
>> > seems to be dropped.
>> >
>> > However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based
>> > version of
>> > OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we have
>> > openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come up with
>> > something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version component
>> > from
>> > our versioning schema for good?
>> >
>> > Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.
>> >
>> > [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >
>> >
>> > __
>> > 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
>
>
>
> __
> 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-16 Thread Igor Kalnitsky 
Oleg,

Awesome! That's what I was looking for. :)

- Igor

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Oleg Gelbukh  wrote:
> Igor,
>
> Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases are dropped.
> [1] [2]
>
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
> [2]
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Oleg Gelbukh
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
> wrote:
>>
>> Oleg,
>>
>> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they planning
>> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
>> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of something
>> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to drop
>> it?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Igor
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> wrote:
>> > Igor,
>> >
>> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in OpenStack. So
>> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in Libery,
>> > Nova
>> > has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have version
>> > 12.0.1,
>> > while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1 for
>> > minor
>> > release.
>> >
>> > The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used in
>> > several
>> > places, the most important being installation path of the fuel-library.
>> > We
>> > won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to
>> > understand
>> > how we are going to handle that.
>> >
>> > My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack version as a
>> > part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library will be
>> > '/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky
>> > 
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hey Oleg,
>> >>
>> >> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases of
>> >> *stable* branch will be versioned?
>> >>
>> >> Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?
>> >>
>> >> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Igor
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> >
>> >> > I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to have in
>> >> > Fuel
>> >> > regarding versioning of OpenStack.
>> >> >
>> >> > As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was decided
>> >> > that
>> >> > since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project
>> >> > changes.
>> >> > Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects, nor the
>> >> > coordinated release is going to have unified number [1]. Individual
>> >> > projects
>> >> > will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release
>> >> > itself
>> >> > seems to be dropped.
>> >> >
>> >> > However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based
>> >> > version of
>> >> > OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we have
>> >> > openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come up
>> >> > with
>> >> > something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version
>> >> > component
>> >> > from
>> >> > our versioning schema for good?
>> >> >
>> >> > Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.
>> >> >
>> >> > [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
>> >> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Best regards,
>> >> > Oleg Gelbukh
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > __
>> >> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > __
>> > 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
>
>
>
>

Re: [openstack-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-16 Thread Oleg Gelbukh 
Igor,

Got your question now. Coordinated point (maintenance) releases are
dropped. [1] [2]

[1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-May/065144.html
[2]
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranchRelease#Planned_stable.2Fliberty_releases

--
Best regards,
Oleg Gelbukh

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 3:30 PM, Igor Kalnitsky 
wrote:

> Oleg,
>
> Yes, I know. Still you didn't answer my question - are they planning
> to release stable branches time-to-time? Like I said, Liberty is
> something similar 2015.2.0. How they will name release of something
> like 2015.2.1 (stable release, with bugfixes) ? Or they plan to drop
> it?
>
> Thanks,
> Igor
>
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> wrote:
> > Igor,
> >
> > The point is that there's no 2015.2.0 version anywhere in OpenStack. So
> > every component will be versioned separately, for example, in Libery,
> Nova
> > has version 12.0.0, and minor release of it is going to have version
> 12.0.1,
> > while Keystone, for instance, will have version 11.0.0 and 11.0.1 for
> minor
> > release.
> >
> > The problem in Fuel is that coordinated release version is used in
> several
> > places, the most important being installation path of the fuel-library.
> We
> > won't be able to use it the same way since Liberty. I'd like to
> understand
> > how we are going to handle that.
> >
> > My suggestion actually is to move away from using OpenStack version as a
> > part of Fuel version. Then the path to install the fuel-library will be
> > '/etc/puppet/8.0.0/'.
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Oleg Gelbukh
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Igor Kalnitsky <
> ikalnit...@mirantis.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hey Oleg,
> >>
> >> I've read the post [1] and I didn't get how exactly minor releases of
> >> *stable* branch will be versioned?
> >>
> >> Let's say 2015.2.0 is Liberty. How 2015.2.1 will be versioned?
> >>
> >> [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Igor
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 6:59 PM, Oleg Gelbukh 
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to have in
> >> > Fuel
> >> > regarding versioning of OpenStack.
> >> >
> >> > As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was decided
> >> > that
> >> > since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project
> changes.
> >> > Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects, nor the
> >> > coordinated release is going to have unified number [1]. Individual
> >> > projects
> >> > will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release
> itself
> >> > seems to be dropped.
> >> >
> >> > However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based
> >> > version of
> >> > OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we have
> >> > openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come up
> with
> >> > something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version component
> >> > from
> >> > our versioning schema for good?
> >> >
> >> > Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.
> >> >
> >> > [1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
> >> > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best regards,
> >> > Oleg Gelbukh
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> __
> >> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> __
> > 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
>
__
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-dev] [fuel] OpenStack versioning in Fuel

2015-10-15 Thread Oleg Gelbukh 
Hello,

I would like to highlight a problem that we are now going to have in Fuel
regarding versioning of OpenStack.

As you know, with introduction of the Big Tent policy it was decided that
since Liberty dev cycle versioning schema of the whole project changes.
Year-based versions won't be assigned to individual projects, nor the
coordinated release is going to have unified number [1]. Individual
projects will have semver version numbers, while numbering of the release
itself seems to be dropped.

However, in Fuel there is a lot of places where we use year-based version
of OpenStack release. [2] How are we going to handle this? Shall we have
openstack_version: 2015.2 all over the place? Or we should come up with
something more sophisticated? Or just drop OpenStack version component from
our versioning schema for good?

Please, share your opinions here or in corresponding reviews.

[1] http://ttx.re/new-versioning.html
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/234296/

--
Best regards,
Oleg Gelbukh
__
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