[ovirt-users] Re: [ovirt-devel] oVirt and Fedora

2020-05-20 Thread Michal Skrivanek 


> On 19 May 2020, at 14:06, Neal Gompa  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:45 AM Michal Skrivanek
>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 11 May 2020, at 14:49, Neal Gompa  wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:32 AM Nir Soffer  wrote:
 
 On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:24 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:
> 
> As far as the oVirt software keeping up with Fedora, the main problem 
> here has always been that people aren't integrating their software into 
> the distribution itself.
>> 
>> it was never a good fit for oVirt to be part of other distributions. We had 
>> individual packages part of Fedora in history, but there are things which 
>> are hard to accept (like automatically enabling of installed services, 
>> UIDs), and overall it’s just too complex, we’re rather a distribution than a 
>> simple app on top of base OS.
>> 
> 
> None of those things are hard to do in Fedora. They're incredibly easy
> to do. I know this because I've gone through this process already
> before.
> 
> But fine, let's assume I consider this argument valid. Then there's
> still no reason not to be continually providing support for Fedora as
> an add-on, as you have before.

the reason is mentioned in the original email, the lack of resources to keep 
actively supporting 3 different platforms.
If you want to provide a helping hand and maintain Fedora infrastructure I 
don’t think anyone would object 

> 
> That's how everything can get tested together. And this comes back to the 
> old bug about fixing vdsm so that it doesn't use /rhev, but instead 
> something FHS-compliant (RHBZ#1369102). Once that is resolved, pretty 
> much the entire stack can go into Fedora. And then you benefit from the 
> Fedora community being able to use, test, and contribute to the oVirt 
> project. As it stands, why would anyone do this for you when you don't 
> even run on the cutting edge platform that feeds into Red Hat Enterprise 
> Linux?
 
 This was actually fixed a long time ago. With this commit:
 https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/commit/67ba9c4bc860840d6e103fe604b16f494f60a09d
 
 You can configure a compatible vdsm that does not use /rhev.
 
 Of course it is not backward compatible, for this we need much more
 work to support live migration
 between old and new vdsm using different data-center configurations.
 
>>> 
>>> It'd probably be simpler to just *change* it to an FHS-compatible path
>>> going forward with EL8 and Fedora and set up a migration path there,
>>> but it's a bit late for that... :(
>> 
>> It wouldn’t. We always support live migration across several versions (now 
>> it’s 4.2-4.4) and it needs to stay the same or youo have to go with arcane 
>> code to mangle it back and forth which gets a bit ugly when you consider 
>> suspend/resume, snapshots, etc
>> 
> 
> Erk. At some point you need to bite the bullet though...

it’s about capacity as well, it’s just a matter of someone writing a code which 
can handle the (long) transition period

Thanks,
michal
___
Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
oVirt Code of Conduct: 
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives: 
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/WWMZ5SYFHRP7QZMXLWCPBDFC2VADMEDX/

[ovirt-users] Re: [ovirt-devel] oVirt and Fedora

2020-05-19 Thread Neal Gompa 
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 11:45 AM Michal Skrivanek
 wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 11 May 2020, at 14:49, Neal Gompa  wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:32 AM Nir Soffer  wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:24 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As far as the oVirt software keeping up with Fedora, the main problem 
> >>> here has always been that people aren't integrating their software into 
> >>> the distribution itself.
>
> it was never a good fit for oVirt to be part of other distributions. We had 
> individual packages part of Fedora in history, but there are things which are 
> hard to accept (like automatically enabling of installed services, UIDs), and 
> overall it’s just too complex, we’re rather a distribution than a simple app 
> on top of base OS.
>

None of those things are hard to do in Fedora. They're incredibly easy
to do. I know this because I've gone through this process already
before.

But fine, let's assume I consider this argument valid. Then there's
still no reason not to be continually providing support for Fedora as
an add-on, as you have before.

> >>> That's how everything can get tested together. And this comes back to the 
> >>> old bug about fixing vdsm so that it doesn't use /rhev, but instead 
> >>> something FHS-compliant (RHBZ#1369102). Once that is resolved, pretty 
> >>> much the entire stack can go into Fedora. And then you benefit from the 
> >>> Fedora community being able to use, test, and contribute to the oVirt 
> >>> project. As it stands, why would anyone do this for you when you don't 
> >>> even run on the cutting edge platform that feeds into Red Hat Enterprise 
> >>> Linux?
> >>
> >> This was actually fixed a long time ago. With this commit:
> >> https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/commit/67ba9c4bc860840d6e103fe604b16f494f60a09d
> >>
> >> You can configure a compatible vdsm that does not use /rhev.
> >>
> >> Of course it is not backward compatible, for this we need much more
> >> work to support live migration
> >> between old and new vdsm using different data-center configurations.
> >>
> >
> > It'd probably be simpler to just *change* it to an FHS-compatible path
> > going forward with EL8 and Fedora and set up a migration path there,
> > but it's a bit late for that... :(
>
> It wouldn’t. We always support live migration across several versions (now 
> it’s 4.2-4.4) and it needs to stay the same or youo have to go with arcane 
> code to mangle it back and forth which gets a bit ugly when you consider 
> suspend/resume, snapshots, etc
>

Erk. At some point you need to bite the bullet though...



--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
oVirt Code of Conduct: 
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives: 
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/I7WTTO72M3K62OQW4SE56KWEXF2YTRYC/

[ovirt-users] Re: [ovirt-devel] oVirt and Fedora

2020-05-11 Thread Michal Skrivanek 


> On 11 May 2020, at 14:49, Neal Gompa  wrote:
> 
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 8:32 AM Nir Soffer  wrote:
>> 
>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:24 PM Neal Gompa  wrote:
>>> 
>>> As far as the oVirt software keeping up with Fedora, the main problem here 
>>> has always been that people aren't integrating their software into the 
>>> distribution itself.

it was never a good fit for oVirt to be part of other distributions. We had 
individual packages part of Fedora in history, but there are things which are 
hard to accept (like automatically enabling of installed services, UIDs), and 
overall it’s just too complex, we’re rather a distribution than a simple app on 
top of base OS.

>>> That's how everything can get tested together. And this comes back to the 
>>> old bug about fixing vdsm so that it doesn't use /rhev, but instead 
>>> something FHS-compliant (RHBZ#1369102). Once that is resolved, pretty much 
>>> the entire stack can go into Fedora. And then you benefit from the Fedora 
>>> community being able to use, test, and contribute to the oVirt project. As 
>>> it stands, why would anyone do this for you when you don't even run on the 
>>> cutting edge platform that feeds into Red Hat Enterprise Linux?
>> 
>> This was actually fixed a long time ago. With this commit:
>> https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/commit/67ba9c4bc860840d6e103fe604b16f494f60a09d
>> 
>> You can configure a compatible vdsm that does not use /rhev.
>> 
>> Of course it is not backward compatible, for this we need much more
>> work to support live migration
>> between old and new vdsm using different data-center configurations.
>> 
> 
> It'd probably be simpler to just *change* it to an FHS-compatible path
> going forward with EL8 and Fedora and set up a migration path there,
> but it's a bit late for that... :(

It wouldn’t. We always support live migration across several versions (now it’s 
4.2-4.4) and it needs to stay the same or youo have to go with arcane code to 
mangle it back and forth which gets a bit ugly when you consider 
suspend/resume, snapshots, etc

> 
> 
> -- 
> 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
> ___
> Devel mailing list -- de...@ovirt.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@ovirt.org
> Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
> oVirt Code of Conduct: 
> https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/de...@ovirt.org/message/SBAZ2F3FCOVGHRL7UNYTBLRX63BSBTCC/
___
Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
oVirt Code of Conduct: 
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives: 
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/SNM3D2ZBFXUQOA5PGU6FTLZOFYLJGM3V/

[ovirt-users] Re: [ovirt-devel] oVirt and Fedora

2020-05-11 Thread Neal Gompa 
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 2:16 AM Sandro Bonazzola 
wrote:

> If you have followed the oVirt project for a few releases you already know
> oVirt has struggled to keep the pace with the fast innovation cycles Fedora
> Project is following.
>
> Back in September 2019 CentOS project launched CentOS Stream as a rolling
> preview of future RHEL kernels and features, providing an upstream
> development platform for ecosystem developers that sits between Fedora and
> RHEL.
>
> Since then the oVirt project tried to keep the software working on Fedora,
> CenOS Stream, and RHEL/CentOS but it became quickly evident the project
> lacked resources to keep the project running on three platforms. Further,
> our user surveys show that oVirt users strongly prefer using oVirt on
> CentOS and RHEL.
>
> With the upcoming end of life of Fedora 30 the oVirt project has decided
> to stop trying to keep the pace with this amazing platform, focusing on
> stabilizing the software codebase on RHEL / CentOS Linux. By focusing our
> resources and community efforts on RHEL/CentOS Linux and Centos Stream, we
> can provide better support for those platforms and use more time for moving
> oVirt forward.
>
>
This is a *humongous* mistake. Almost *everything* with virtualization and
storage *starts* in Fedora. And there are some configurations that will
*not* be possible in CentOS Stream because of the nature of it.

As far as the oVirt software keeping up with Fedora, the main problem here
has always been that people aren't integrating their software into the
distribution itself. That's how everything can get tested together. And
this comes back to the old bug about fixing vdsm so that it doesn't use
/rhev, but instead something FHS-compliant (RHBZ#1369102
). Once that is resolved, pretty much
the entire stack can go into Fedora. And then you benefit from the Fedora
community being able to use, test, and contribute to the oVirt project. As
it stands, why would anyone do this for you when you don't even run on the
cutting edge platform that feeds into Red Hat Enterprise Linux?

It also seems like the oVirt folks are not learning from the mistakes of
the RDO project. They gave up on Fedora several years ago, and wound up
spending close to two years playing catchup on Python 3, DNF, modularity,
virtualization packaging changes, storage APIs, and everything else all at
once. They ground to a *halt.* They paid a price for not keeping up. And
their excuse of unaligned lifecycles stopped being true more than two years
ago, when OpenStack's release cycles aligned on Fedora's again. They also
proved that Fedora's "churn" wasn't the problem because when push comes to
shove, they were able to do something based on Fedora 28 (knowing it was
the base for RHEL 8).

CentOS Stream is worthless in most respects because you aren't really
testing or integrating anything new most of the time, you're just making
new releases of your software on a stale platform. Again, the purpose of
CentOS Stream is to provide a window into the RHEL stream development,
which by the nature of things isn't very useful for future-proofing.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
oVirt Code of Conduct: 
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives: 
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/JM5UNXG6YI7R23NUR5LLW3TV3KDMPU2A/

[ovirt-users] Re: [ovirt-devel] oVirt and Fedora

2020-05-11 Thread Nir Soffer 
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 10:01 AM Sandro Bonazzola 
wrote:

>
>
> Il giorno lun 11 mag 2020 alle ore 08:50 Nir Soffer 
> ha scritto:
>
>> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 9:16 AM Sandro Bonazzola 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If you have followed the oVirt project for a few releases you already
>>> know oVirt has struggled to keep the pace with the fast innovation cycles
>>> Fedora Project is following.
>>>
>>> Back in September 2019 CentOS project launched CentOS Stream as a
>>> rolling preview of future RHEL kernels and features, providing an upstream
>>> development platform for ecosystem developers that sits between Fedora and
>>> RHEL.
>>>
>>> Since then the oVirt project tried to keep the software working on
>>> Fedora, CenOS Stream, and RHEL/CentOS but it became quickly evident the
>>> project lacked resources to keep the project running on three platforms.
>>> Further, our user surveys show that oVirt users strongly prefer using oVirt
>>> on CentOS and RHEL.
>>>
>>> With the upcoming end of life of Fedora 30 the oVirt project has decided
>>> to stop trying to keep the pace with this amazing platform, focusing on
>>> stabilizing the software codebase on RHEL / CentOS Linux. By focusing our
>>> resources and community efforts on RHEL/CentOS Linux and Centos Stream, we
>>> can provide better support for those platforms and use more time for moving
>>> oVirt forward.
>>>
>>
>> Where was this discussed?
>>
>> There is nothing about this in de...@ovirt.org or any other public
>> mailing list.
>>
>> I think this is a big mistake. It will mainly harm development since
>> Fedora is the only platform where
>> we can test early upstream changes, many months (and sometimes years)
>> before the packages reach
>> RHEL/CentOS.
>>
>> Nir
>>
>
> It has been discussed within team leads meeting and made clear by replies
> we keep giving when someone ask about Fedora.
> See "[ovirt-users] install oVirt on Fedora31", "[ovirt-users] oVirt orb
> python3/fedora 31 support".
>
> This doesn't mean that individual developers can try to get their packages
> working on Fedora or test their code on Fedora.
> This means that we are not committed to keep trying to support Fedora as a
> project.
>

Again, there was no discussion about this in public, but we can start the
discussion here.

The result of such a change is that soon there will be no way to install
vdsm on Fedora,
because we need only one maintainer that does not care about Fedora.

Then we cannot test vdsm with upstream libvirt and qemu, which will harm
our ability to develop
features like incremental backup, which was developed in the last year on
Fedora, using upstream
libvirt and qemu or upstream patches.

Another example, if you want to test sanlock fixes that will be available
in RHEL 8.3, the only way
to do this now is on Fedora - the fixes are available in updates-testing.
So we can make sure our
code is compatible with new sanlock now, or wait until 8.3 is out and find
about regressions
very late before the release.

This is a common trend  in the last 6.5 years - oVirt is not tested on
Fedora (e.g. no ovirt
systems on Fedora), leading to late detection of issues, and regressions in
new versions
in RHEL/CentOS.

What we should do instead is focus on Fedora support and testing early
upstream packages.

Currently oVirt is tested on CentOS 8.1, which is irrelevant to oVirt 4.4.
What we really need
is to test on RHEL 8.2 nightly builds, but this is not available to the
public and cannot be
used by an upstream project. But Fedora 32 is available and includes all
the packages
needed for valuable testing, so this should be our main platform for
testing.

CentOS stream could be a good solution for testing, if we could get the
advanced virt module
*before* the module is released in RHEL. Otherwise we test on old version
and we don't detect
issues in time.

Nir
___
Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
oVirt Code of Conduct: 
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives: 
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/7VNRYA4773D7APLDO74DL22YBT4H5G65/

[ovirt-users] Re: [ovirt-devel] oVirt and Fedora

2020-05-10 Thread Nir Soffer 
On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 9:16 AM Sandro Bonazzola 
wrote:

> If you have followed the oVirt project for a few releases you already know
> oVirt has struggled to keep the pace with the fast innovation cycles Fedora
> Project is following.
>
> Back in September 2019 CentOS project launched CentOS Stream as a rolling
> preview of future RHEL kernels and features, providing an upstream
> development platform for ecosystem developers that sits between Fedora and
> RHEL.
>
> Since then the oVirt project tried to keep the software working on Fedora,
> CenOS Stream, and RHEL/CentOS but it became quickly evident the project
> lacked resources to keep the project running on three platforms. Further,
> our user surveys show that oVirt users strongly prefer using oVirt on
> CentOS and RHEL.
>
> With the upcoming end of life of Fedora 30 the oVirt project has decided
> to stop trying to keep the pace with this amazing platform, focusing on
> stabilizing the software codebase on RHEL / CentOS Linux. By focusing our
> resources and community efforts on RHEL/CentOS Linux and Centos Stream, we
> can provide better support for those platforms and use more time for moving
> oVirt forward.
>

Where was this discussed?

There is nothing about this in de...@ovirt.org or any other public mailing
list.

I think this is a big mistake. It will mainly harm development since Fedora
is the only platform where
we can test early upstream changes, many months (and sometimes years)
before the packages reach
RHEL/CentOS.

Nir
___
Users mailing list -- users@ovirt.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@ovirt.org
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
oVirt Code of Conduct: 
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives: 
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/6CP7NPGHRFBULBWLD67HNHQWY4WEMZER/