+1 to option 3. Also I'm voicing to EPSCO that they should keep the Django14 around for "legacy" purposes. I've been e-mailing on epel-devel to that end too. We'll see what the sunset plan is for that at the next EPSCO meeting tomorrow.
On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:37 AM, Ina Panova <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 to option 3 > > -------- > Regards, > > Ina Panova > Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. > > "Do not go where the path may lead, > go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Hrivnak" <[email protected]> > To: "Brian Bouterse" <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 9:32:08 PM > Subject: Re: [Pulp-dev] Upcoming epel6 Dependency Issues > > Thanks for the clarification. If they do end up removing Django14 from > epel6, I think we have these options: > > 1) Provide a django package ourselves. No supported django release runs on > python 2.6, so we would be providing an unsupported version. > 2) Show users how to install django some other way. Either by retrieving > the Django14 package direct from the build system, or via pip, or something > else. It's clear in this case that the user is taking responsibility for > installing an old and unsupported version of django, and they must be > vigilant. It's the price for running pulp on el6. > 3) Stop supporting el6. This might be the nail in the coffin. It's getting > harder all the time to provide supported dependencies on el6, and el7 has > been out for a while now. If the platform removes one of our biggest > dependencies, there's only so much effort we should reasonably go to as an > upstream to keep it working. > > Thoughts? Preferences? I lean toward option 3 but could be persuaded. > > Michael > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 4:18 PM, Brian Bouterse < [email protected] > > wrote: > > > > That date was all wrong. The real date is Wednesday 11/9 at 18:00 UTC in > #fedora-meeting on freenode. > > Yes they would add python34 to epel6, then add Django 1.8 package that > only runs on Python 3.4. Since there are a lot of cve's against Django14 > they seemed inclined to remove it soon. Packages being incompatible with > the 3.4 runtime would have to handle that themselves. As you point out, > once Django14 is removed, anything Pulp 2.6+ would break. > > We should try to get them to leave Django14 in the repo for as long as > possible. It's called Django14 and the new one would be python-django I > believe, so there shouldn't be an issue with them both being offered in > epel6. > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Michael Hrivnak < [email protected] > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:10 PM, Brian Bouterse < [email protected] > > wrote: > > > > It seems that the mongodb and Django14 packages in EPEL6 are going to be > changing in some big ways. It's still early in the conversation, but here > is what I've learned at the EPSCO (EPel Steering COmmitee) meeting today[0]. > > mongodb 2.4 is not supported upstream from epel and EPSCO approved an > upgrade of mongodb in epel6. It will likely be to a 3.x based version. It > will first be pushed to epel-testing first. What is the newest mongodb that > we are compatible with? do we know? > > One idea I have is to create pulp-smash test jobs which are testing pulp > using bits from epel-testing in addition to epel-release. That will help us > identify issues before one day it just breaks on us. > > Also, Django14 is on the short list to be pulled from epel6 due to > upstream not supporting it and is unmaintained from a cve perspective. > Everyone recognizes now that it must be replaced with something versus what > happened last time of having it just removed. The current thinking is to > add python34 (not scl) to epel6 and add python-django 1.8 to epel6 also. > The will be discussed again at the EPSCO meeting next week on Thursday 11/2 > at 18:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting on freenode. I'm planning to attend, but > come if you're interested. > > One or more parts of the date/time can't be right. Can you double-check? > > > > > This still isn't great for Pulp 2.y on EL6. Pulp will break when Django14 > is removed, even if Django 1.8 is available because Pulp 2.y and all of its > deps would have to be updated to run in the Python 3.4 runtime. I believe > this will likely happen before Pulp 3 is even released. I don't think we're > going to switch the EL6 runtime to Python 3.4 for Pulp 2.y, so we need to > think carefully about our options here. > > Are you saying they would add python34 to epel6, then add a django 1.8 > package that only runs on python 3.4? I suppose that would make some sense > since django 1.8 dropped support for python 2.6. But it wouldn't be much > help for pulp 2.y. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
