Hi Jan,
From my reading of Sage's email, hammer would continue to be supported
on older distros, but new development would not target those releases.
Was that your impression as well?
As a former system administrator I feel your pain. Upgrading to new
distros is a ton of work and incurs a ton of uncertainty and potential
problems and liability. I truly think though that we will have a lot
more luck testing and bug fixing new Ceph releases if we can focus
specifically on new distro support and not get distracted with trying to
maintain compatability for new Ceph releases on previous generation LTS
distro releases.
IE it's one thing if we've already tested say Hammer on those distros
and minor bug fixes aren't likely to hit weird lurking kernel or distro
bugs that aren't likely to get fixed. With new releases though,
there's a ton of things we change, and some of them may be tied to
expecting certain behavior in the kernel (Random example: XFS not
blowing up with sparse writes when non-default extent sizes are used).
At some point we need to stop make exceptions for stuff like this
because an old kernel may not have a patch or behavior that we need to
move Ceph forward.
Mark
On 07/30/2015 09:29 AM, Jan “Zviratko” Schermer wrote:
I understand your reasons, but dropping support for LTS release like this
is not right.
You should /lege artis/ support every distribution the LTS release could
have
ever been installed on - that’s what the LTS label is for and what we
rely on
once we build a project on top of it
CentOS 6 in particular is still very widely used and even installed,
enterprise
apps rely on it to this day. Someone out there is surely maintaining
their LTS
Ceph release on this distro and not having tested packages will hurt badly.
We don’t want out project managers selecting EMC SAN over CEPH SDS
because of such uncertainty, and you should benchmark yourself to those
vendors, maybe...
Every developer loves dropping support and concentrating on the bleeding
edge interesting stuff but that’s not how it should work.
Just my 2 cents...
Jan
On 30 Jul 2015, at 15:54, Sage Weil <sw...@redhat.com
<mailto:sw...@redhat.com>> wrote:
As time marches on it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain proper
builds and packages for older distros. For example, as we make the
systemd transition, maintaining the kludgey sysvinit and udev support for
centos6/rhel6 is a pain in the butt and eats up time and energy to
maintain and test that we could be spending doing more useful work.
"Dropping" them would mean:
- Ongoing development on master (and future versions like infernalis and
jewel) would not be tested on these distros.
- We would stop building upstream release packages on ceph.com
<http://ceph.com> for new
releases.
- We would probably continue building hammer and firefly packages for
future bugfix point releases.
- The downstream distros would probably continue to package them, but the
burden would be on them. For example, if Ubuntu wanted to ship Jewel on
precise 12.04, they could, but they'd probably need to futz with the
packaging and/or build environment to make it work.
So... given that, I'd like to gauge user interest in these old distros.
Specifically,
CentOS6 / RHEL6
Ubuntu precise 12.04
Debian wheezy
Would anyone miss them?
In particular, dropping these three would mean we could drop sysvinit
entirely and focus on systemd (and continue maintaining the existing
upstart files for just a bit longer). That would be a relief. (The
sysvinit files wouldn't go away in the source tree, but we wouldn't worry
about packaging and testing them properly.)
Thanks!
sage
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com <mailto:ceph-users@lists.ceph.com>
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@lists.ceph.com
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
