On 4 January 2014 08:44, Doug Hellmann <doug.hellm...@dreamhost.com> wrote: > > >
> I understand that moving taskflow into oslo would avoid the policy decision > we have in place to not do symmetric gating on unreleased versions of things > not "owned" by the OpenStack project. However, I don't know if we want to be > testing against the git head of libraries no matter where they live. As > fungi pointed out on IRC, gating against pre-release versions of libraries > may allow us to reach a state where the software works when installed from > git, but not from the released packages. We've certainly hit that situation with nova and neutron where there were undetected, undocumented issues between trunk server and last-release client. [TripleO deploys with requirements.txt requirements, not 'trunk', of each project...] because when we deploy a released server, at the time we set this up, there was no way to identify the matching trunk revisions. We could change this now, but it's been useful to identify unreleased client code being used as a hard dep in servers - a bad situation. > It seems safer to gate changes to libraries against the apps' trunk (to > avoid making backwards-incompatible changes), and then gate changes to the > apps against the released libraries (to ensure they work with something > available to be packaged by the distros). There are lots and lots of version > numbers available to us, so I see no problem with releasing new versions of > libraries frequently. +1. I do see the issue Sean is pointing at, which is that we have to fix the libraries first and then the things that use them. OTOH thats normal in the software world, I don't see anything unique about it. -Rob -- Robert Collins <rbtcoll...@hp.com> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev