This again may be more effort than it's worth, but would a 3.99 agent be possible that can talk to a 3.x and 4.x master? Maybe it only has the future parser to make compatibility with the 4.0 master easier. It would break semver a bit, hence the massive version jump, but would make upgrading easier.
> On Nov 20, 2014, at 05:08, Felix Frank <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On 11/20/2014 12:17 PM, Daniele Sluijters wrote: >> First question is, can you gracefully deprecate a line of agents, i.e. >> retain 3.x agent compatibility throughout 4.x masters, and drop it >> at 5.0. >> I shall assume that the engineering effort to go such a route would >> be a >> magnitude or two above just dropping cross-version support, so doing >> the >> hard cut is likely the right thing to do. But I will go on record >> stating that this is not the kind of decision that should be made >> lightly. >> >> >> But why not do it in Puppet 4 but do it in Puppet 5? This seems >> completely arbitrary like "I would prefer if you hold off to Puppet 5", >> but what's to stop it from going "I would prefer to hold off until >> Puppet 6" by the time 5 is ready to roll out? >> >> Now, that was your first question, what's the second? > > Granted, 5.0 is somewhat arbitrary. Not breaking 3.x support before the > 4.1 master would also go a long way, too, for example. > > The point is, do I need to introduce a turning point at which each of my > agents will either > a) talk to the obosolete 3.x master only or > b) talk to the newly added 4.x master only > > With a deprecation period, I can replace the 3.x master with 4.0 after > making sure that no major breakage follows suit, without the pressure of > updating each last agent (or live with two sets of potentially diverging > masters). It is only the 4.1 master that will not be viable until agents > are upgraded. > > I regard this as an advantage because such minor updates are generally > less problematic (and fear inducing to the ops team). > > The second question is the one Eric posed initially: Is a major version > change an opportune time to break the network in this fashion. The > answer to this is most definitely "yes" and - again - I'm not actively > contesting the choice to do this with 4.0. > > Cheers, > Felix > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Puppet Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/546DD9BB.5080901%40alumni.tu-berlin.de. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Puppet Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/puppet-dev/F0D29CA9-F2C5-474A-90F0-96F028C93557%40infiniteviewtech.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
