On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Dean Troyer <dtro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Joshua Hesketh <joshua.hesk...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> The question now is whether or not to continue running. Is there still >> value in running turbo-hipster? It uses significant resources and it feels >> that developers have learned the lessons it was designed to teach. >> > > Is there any value in running turbo-hipster as a periodic job across > multiple releases? One common request from operators is to be able to > upgrade directly from, say, kilo to mitaka or newton. I know there are > other factors involved in that (APIs, objects, etc), the question is if > this is a necessary/useful component of testing that upgrade path? > No I don't think there is value. Once a migration is in the code base it's very difficult to change it in any non-idempotent way. Some deployments run very close to master and fixing a past migration would mean maintaining users with diverged databases. > > dt > > -- > > Dean Troyer > dtro...@gmail.com > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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
