Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/16/2015 06:41 PM, Allison Randal wrote: > On 06/15/2015 01:43 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: >> While I agree those points are valid, and going to be helpful, moving >> under OpenStack (even Stackforge) does also offer the chance to get more >> test integration upstream (not saying this was the ori

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/15/2015 10:43 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: > On 06/15/2015 03:03 PM, Allison Randal wrote: >> On 06/15/2015 11:48 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: >>> On 06/15/2015 04:55 PM, James Page wrote: The problem of managing delta and allowing a good level of distribution independence is still going t

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/15/2015 10:55 AM, James Page wrote: We understand and have communicated from the start of this conversation that we will need to be able to maintain deltas between Debian and Ubuntu - for both technical reasons, in the way the distributions work (think Ubuntu main vs universe), as well as o

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/16/2015 12:41 PM, Allison Randal wrote: On 06/15/2015 01:43 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: While I agree those points are valid, and going to be helpful, moving under OpenStack (even Stackforge) does also offer the chance to get more test integration upstream (not saying this was the original sc

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/15/2015 01:43 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: > While I agree those points are valid, and going to be helpful, moving > under OpenStack (even Stackforge) does also offer the chance to get more > test integration upstream (not saying this was the original scope). > However, this could also be achieve

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi Thomas On 15/06/15 19:48, Thomas Goirand wrote: [...] > During our discussions at the Summit, you seemed to be > enthusiastic about pushing our packaging to Stackforge. Then others > told me to "push it to the /openstack namespace" to make it "mo

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/15/2015 03:03 PM, Allison Randal wrote: On 06/15/2015 11:48 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 06/15/2015 04:55 PM, James Page wrote: The problem of managing delta and allowing a good level of distribution independence is still going to continue to exist and will be more difficult to manage due

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/15/2015 11:48 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 06/15/2015 04:55 PM, James Page wrote: >> The problem of managing delta and allowing a good level of >> distribution independence is still going to continue to exist and will >> be more difficult to manage due to the tighter coupling of development

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/15/2015 04:55 PM, James Page wrote: > Hi All > > On 27/05/15 09:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> tl;dr: - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on >> upstream gerrit with reviews. - The intention is to better share >> the workload, and improve the overall QA for packaging *and* >

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi All On 27/05/15 09:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: > tl;dr: - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on > upstream gerrit with reviews. - The intention is to better share > the workload, and improve the overall QA for packaging *and* > u

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/10/2015 04:31 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Ian Cordasco > mailto:ian.corda...@rackspace.com>> wrote: > > > > On 6/10/15, 09:12, "Thomas Goirand" > wrote: > > >On 06/10/2015 12:25 PM, Dave Walker wrote: > >> The ini

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > > > On 6/10/15, 09:12, "Thomas Goirand" wrote: > > >On 06/10/2015 12:25 PM, Dave Walker wrote: > >> The initial core reviewers was seeded by representatives of distro's and > >> vendors to get their input on viability in distro's. > > > >Rea

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 6/10/15, 09:12, "Thomas Goirand" wrote: >On 06/10/2015 12:25 PM, Dave Walker wrote: >> The initial core reviewers was seeded by representatives of distro's and >> vendors to get their input on viability in distro's. > >Really? James, were you made core on the requirements? > >I once tried to

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 10 June 2015 at 15:12, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 06/10/2015 12:25 PM, Dave Walker wrote: >> The initial core reviewers was seeded by representatives of distro's and >> vendors to get their input on viability in distro's. > > Really? James, were you made core on the requirements? > > I once tri

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 10/06/15 15:12, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> The initial core reviewers was seeded by representatives of >> distro's and >>> vendors to get their input on viability in distro's. > Really? James, were you made core on the requirements? Believe it or n

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/10/2015 12:25 PM, Dave Walker wrote: > The initial core reviewers was seeded by representatives of distro's and > vendors to get their input on viability in distro's. Really? James, were you made core on the requirements? I once tried to follow the requirements repo, though it moves too fas

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Excerpts from Matthias Runge's message of 2015-06-10 12:29:45 +0200: > On 10/06/15 12:07, Robert Collins wrote: > > On 10 June 2015 at 20:12, Matthias Runge wrote: > > > >> Since our software is to be consumed by packages, shouldn't the packages > >> project consider itself to be responsible for g

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 10/06/15 12:07, Robert Collins wrote: On 10 June 2015 at 20:12, Matthias Runge wrote: Since our software is to be consumed by packages, shouldn't the packages project consider itself to be responsible for global requirements? I.e. checking, if requirements are packageable, if versions fit,

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Hi Derek, > I selected these 80 to move all of what RDO is currently maintaining on > gerrithub to review.openstack.org, this was perhaps too big a set and in RDO > we instead may need to go hybrid. Yeah, In my opinion we ahve lots of repeated divergence between the different python modules, so g

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 10 June 2015 at 11:07, Robert Collins wrote: > On 10 June 2015 at 20:12, Matthias Runge wrote: > >> Since our software is to be consumed by packages, shouldn't the packages >> project consider itself to be responsible for global requirements? I.e. >> checking, if requirements are packageable,

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 10 June 2015 at 20:12, Matthias Runge wrote: > Since our software is to be consumed by packages, shouldn't the packages > project consider itself to be responsible for global requirements? I.e. > checking, if requirements are packageable, if versions fit, etc. I think we welcome input from di

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 27/05/15 10:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, tl;dr: - - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on upstream gerrit with reviews. - - The intention is to better share the workload, and improve the overall QA for packaging *and* up

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/09/2015 05:37 AM, Dirk Müller wrote: Hi Derek, 2015-06-09 0:34 GMT+02:00 Derek Higgins : This patch would result in 80 packaging repositories being pulled into gerrit. I personally would prefer to start with fewer but common packages between all RPM distros (is there more than Red Hat

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 09/06/15 10:37, Dirk Müller wrote: Hi Derek, 2015-06-09 0:34 GMT+02:00 Derek Higgins : This patch would result in 80 packaging repositories being pulled into gerrit. I personally would prefer to start with fewer but common packages between all RPM distros (is there more than Red Hat and

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Hi Derek, 2015-06-09 0:34 GMT+02:00 Derek Higgins : > This patch would result in 80 packaging repositories being pulled into > gerrit. I personally would prefer to start with fewer but common packages between all RPM distros (is there more than Red Hat and SUSE ?) than starting the process with

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/09/2015 10:20 AM, James Page wrote: > LGTM - although for any initial repository migration, I'd like to see > Ubuntu (from bzr) and Debian (git.debian.org) branches separately for > projects that have Vcs branches for Ubuntu so that we can manage that > delta I keep going on about effectively

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 08/06/15 22:36, Thomas Goirand wrote: [...] > I have sorted this list into categories, and sorted these > categories in an increasing order of likelihood to be maintained in > upstream gerrit. > > On the below list, I believe we should have in up

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 03/06/15 17:28, Haïkel wrote: 2015-06-03 17:23 GMT+02:00 Thomas Goirand : i On 06/03/2015 12:41 AM, James E. Blair wrote: Hi, This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an update from the discussion. I've just read the IRC logs. And there's one thing I would like

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/08/2015 10:39 AM, James Page wrote: > On 02/06/15 23:41, James E. Blair wrote: >> 3) What are the plans for repositories and their contents? > >> What repos will be created, and what will be in them. When will >> new ones be created, and is there any process around that. > > Having taken s

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/08/2015 10:26 AM, James Page wrote: > The Ubuntu packaging is used widely by end-users and a number of other > projects including the OpenStack Puppet and Chef modules as well as > the Juju charms for OpenStack - any changes to structure and behaviour > are going to have much wider impact and

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/08/2015 05:29 PM, Neil Jerram wrote: > On 04/06/15 22:54, Thomas Goirand wrote: > >> The init scripts used to be hard to maintain because they were many, but >> since Debian & Ubuntu are using automatic generation out of a tiny >> template (with sysv-rc, systemd and upstart all supported), t

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/08/2015 08:32 AM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > The "control files" (specs, deb) are indeed different, the question is > what they can share. > > I see collaboration possibilities on package names and layout - like how > to split a package up -, configuration files, defaults... This doesn't > need

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 04/06/15 22:54, Thomas Goirand wrote: The init scripts used to be hard to maintain because they were many, but since Debian & Ubuntu are using automatic generation out of a tiny template (with sysv-rc, systemd and upstart all supported), this is a problem solved. Ooh, that sounds like somet

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 02/06/15 23:41, James E. Blair wrote: > 3) What are the plans for repositories and their contents? > > What repos will be created, and what will be in them. When will > new ones be created, and is there any process around that. Having taken som

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Thomas On 03/06/15 16:23, Thomas Goirand wrote: >>> This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to >>> provide an update from the discussion. > I've just read the IRC logs. And there's one thing I would like to > make super clear. > > W

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/04/2015 01:25 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 06/03/2015 08:07 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: On 06/03/2015 03:57 PM, James Page wrote: [...] After some discussion with Thomas on IRC, I think this is more than one effort; The skills and motivation for developers reviewing proposed packaging chang

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Hi Clint, Thanks for your contribution to this thread. On 06/04/2015 10:35 PM, Clint Adams wrote: > On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 04:30:17PM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: >> The closer we can get logic about what a service should look like on >> disk back into that service itself, the less work duplicated b

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 04:30:17PM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > The closer we can get logic about what a service should look like on > disk back into that service itself, the less work duplicated by any of > the installers, and the more common OpenStack envs would be. The fact > that every installer

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-06-04 02:01:25 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: > FYI, I'm also for having a separate namespace, just because adding more > than 150 Git repositories at once in /openstack will be a huge mess. [...] Simply from an infra standpoint there's no real distinction. We only ended up with that

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Hi Haikel! On 06/03/2015 06:28 PM, Haïkel wrote: > First, we all agree that we should move packaging recipes (to use a > neutral term) > and reviewing to upstream gerrit. That should *NOT* be delayed. > We (RDO) are even willing to transfer full control of the openstack-packages > namespace on git

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 08:15 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > On 06/03/2015 04:22 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> We could try to work as a single entity (RPM + deb teams), but rpm+yum >> and dpkg+apt are 2 distinct worlds which have very few common >> attributes. So even if it may socially be nice, it's not the ri

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 09:21 PM, Dean Troyer wrote: > I think it would be beneficial to have a single team and single PTL with > multiple sets of repos This isn't the direction we're taking, sorry. Yes, we can try to work as much as possible together, and try to have consistency across distributions if pos

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 03:31 PM, Haïkel wrote: > 2015-06-03 23:41 GMT+02:00 Allison Randal : > > I have to disagree on that point, integration with underlying OS and low-level > services is important. If that integration doesn't exists, it's > off-loaded to the > operators. So downstream packages bring mor

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 08:07 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > On 06/03/2015 03:57 PM, James Page wrote: >> [...] >> After some discussion with Thomas on IRC, I think this is more than >> one effort; The skills and motivation for developers reviewing >> proposed packaging changes needs to be aligned IMO - so I th

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

2015-06-03 23:41 GMT+02:00 Allison Randal : > > TBH, I don't think pip or distro packaging are ever going to be the > right answer for fully configuring an OpenStack cloud. Because, there is > no "one true cloud", there are a variety of different configurations and > combinations depending on wheth

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 01:30 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > > So wouldn't that be more of an arguement to move as much of the > installation logic back into the python packages as possible. > > So that "pip install nova" was a thing that you could do, and get > reasonable results, and then the packaging teams wo

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 12:08 PM, Allison Randal wrote: > On 06/03/2015 07:22 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> >> However, talking with James Page (from Canonical, head of their server >> team which does the OpenStack packaging), we believe it's best if we had >> 2 different distinct teams: one for Fedora/SuSe/e

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-06-03 20:15:05 +0200 (+0200), Andreas Jaeger wrote: [...] > You could still have one shared repository with the understanding > of who approves what. Working on one repo makes it easier to see > what the other "team" does. [...] For that matter, if different distros used different branches

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

[purely outside-looking-in observation below...] On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 1:07 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > On 06/03/2015 03:57 PM, James Page wrote: > > [...] > >> After some discussion with Thomas on IRC, I think this is more than >> one effort; The skills and motivation for developers reviewing

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 04:22 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi James B., Thanks for this reply. As you asked for ACK from all parts, my words will be very much like the ones of James P. (I've just read his message, and I'm jealous of his nice native-English wo

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 03:57 PM, James Page wrote: > [...] After some discussion with Thomas on IRC, I think this is more than one effort; The skills and motivation for developers reviewing proposed packaging changes needs to be aligned IMO - so I think it makes sense to split the packaging teams between:

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 11:23 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: i On 06/03/2015 12:41 AM, James E. Blair wrote: Hi, This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an update from the discussion. I've just read the IRC logs. And there's one thing I would like to make super clear. We, ie: Deb

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

2015-06-03 17:23 GMT+02:00 Thomas Goirand : > i > On 06/03/2015 12:41 AM, James E. Blair wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an >> update from the discussion. > > I've just read the IRC logs. And there's one thing I would like to make > super clear

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 07:22 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > > However, talking with James Page (from Canonical, head of their server > team which does the OpenStack packaging), we believe it's best if we had > 2 different distinct teams: one for Fedora/SuSe/everything-rpm, and one > for Debian based distribut

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

i On 06/03/2015 12:41 AM, James E. Blair wrote: > Hi, > > This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an > update from the discussion. I've just read the IRC logs. And there's one thing I would like to make super clear. We, ie: Debian & Ubuntu folks, are very much clear on

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 04:15 PM, Derek Higgins wrote: > o Tools to build packages in CI jobs should provide a consistent > interface regardless of packaging being built Sure, we can have *some* of the tooling converging. But I don't see Debian/Ubuntu using anything else than git-buildpackage and sbuild (as

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/03/2015 06:47 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 06/02/2015 10:40 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: >> On 06/02/2015 05:41 PM, James E. Blair wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an >>> update from the discussion. >>> >>> In general, I think there is a lot

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi James B., Thanks for this reply. As you asked for ACK from all parts, my words will be very much like the ones of James P. (I've just read his message, and I'm jealous of his nice native-English wording...:)). On 06/03/2015 12:41 AM, James E. B

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 02/06/15 23:41, James E. Blair wrote: Hi, This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an update from the discussion. In general, I think there is a lot of support for a packaging effort in OpenStack. The discussion here has been great; we need to answer a few questi

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi James On 02/06/15 23:41, James E. Blair wrote: > This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide > an update from the discussion. Thankyou - much appreciated. > In general, I think there is a lot of support for a packaging >

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/02/2015 10:40 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: > On 06/02/2015 05:41 PM, James E. Blair wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an >> update from the discussion. >> >> In general, I think there is a lot of support for a packaging effort in >> OpenStack.

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/02/2015 05:41 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > Hi, > > This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an > update from the discussion. > > In general, I think there is a lot of support for a packaging effort in > OpenStack. The discussion here has been great; we need to answ

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Hi, This came up at the TC meeting today, and I volunteered to provide an update from the discussion. In general, I think there is a lot of support for a packaging effort in OpenStack. The discussion here has been great; we need to answer a few questions, get some decisions written down, and mak

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/02/2015 02:39 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-06-02 09:02:42 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: > [...] >> That will be the little bit more tricky part. Some libraries are very >> small, and probably caching will not be useful (too much work when >> building the VM image). However, for

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-06-02 12:39:30 + (+), Jeremy Stanley wrote: > Well, my point is those repos are already cached on every worker in > /opt/git (e.g., /opt/git/openstack/nova) and you can git clone, cp > or rsync those into your package build chroot. Then git remote > set-url, update and reset --hard

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-06-02 09:02:42 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: [...] > That will be the little bit more tricky part. Some libraries are very > small, and probably caching will not be useful (too much work when > building the VM image). However, for big projects (nova, neutron, > cinder...), then we'll

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 06/01/2015 07:16 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-06-01 14:55:06 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: > [...] >> So, should I start writing a script to build an image for package >> building (ie: an image with sbuild, git-buildpackage, and so on...)? > [...] > > Probably what we'd want to do

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-06-01 14:55:06 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: [...] > So, should I start writing a script to build an image for package > building (ie: an image with sbuild, git-buildpackage, and so on...)? [...] Probably what we'd want to do is something like debootstrap/rpmstrap a chroot for each

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 05/29/2015 11:03 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-05-28 23:19:36 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: > [...] >> By the way, I was thinking about the sbuild package caching system, and >> thought: how about network mounting /var/cache/pbuilder/aptcache using >> something like Manila (or any o

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 05/29/2015 11:37 AM, Derek Higgins wrote: > Whats important I think is > that we can change things to use sbuild without docker if that is what > works best for you for debs. Ok. Though if we are to use delorean, we'll have to switch to that in upstream Debian as well, and I'm not sure if that'

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-05-29 21:01:23 + (+), Dmitry Borodaenko wrote: > I think is unnecessarily maximalist. Trust is not an > all-or-nothing boolean flag: why can't you trust that server to do > more work at the same level of trust and run another batch of > user-submitted code? Because it turns out to

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-05-28 23:19:36 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: [...] > By the way, I was thinking about the sbuild package caching system, and > thought: how about network mounting /var/cache/pbuilder/aptcache using > something like Manila (or any other distributed filesystem)? Does infra > have such

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 1:48 PM Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-05-28 23:09:41 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: > > Also, it is my understanding that infra will not accept to use > > long-living VMs, and prefer to spawn new instances. > > Right, after we run arbitrary user-submitted code on a

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-05-29 10:37:43 +0100 (+0100), Derek Higgins wrote: [...] > I think the feature in delorean that is most useful is that it > will continue to maintain a history of usable package repositories > representing the openstack projects over time, for this we would > need a long running instance, b

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-05-28 23:09:41 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: [...] > Also, it is my understanding that infra will not accept to use > long-living VMs, and prefer to spawn new instances. [...] Right, after we run arbitrary user-submitted code on a server, we cease to be able to trust it and so immed

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 2015-05-28 22:45:37 + (+), Fox, Kevin M wrote: > You could pass the cache through with a volume Yeah, from the "what can we do with our current CI infrastructure?" perspective, we would just need a way to identify what bits benefit from being cached for these particular builds and t

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 29/05/15 02:54, Steve Kowalik wrote: On 29/05/15 06:41, Haïkel wrote: Here's the main script to rebuild a RPM package. https://github.com/openstack-packages/delorean/blob/master/scripts/build_rpm.sh The script basically uses rpmbuild to build packages, we could have a build_deb.sh that use

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 28/05/15 20:58, Paul Belanger wrote: On 05/27/2015 05:26 PM, Derek Higgins wrote: On 27/05/15 09:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, tl;dr: - - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on upstream gerrit with reviews. - - The int

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 28/05/15 22:09, Thomas Goirand wrote: On 05/28/2015 02:53 PM, Derek Higgins wrote: On 28/05/15 12:07, Jaume Devesa wrote: Hi Thomas, Delorean is a tool to build rpm packages from master branches (maybe any branch?) of OpenStack projects. Check out here: https://www.rdoproject.org/packa

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 29/05/15 06:41, Haïkel wrote: > Here's the main script to rebuild a RPM package. > https://github.com/openstack-packages/delorean/blob/master/scripts/build_rpm.sh > > The script basically uses rpmbuild to build packages, we could have a > build_deb.sh that uses > sbuild and add dockerfiles for

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

nks, Kevin From: Thomas Goirand [z...@debian.org] Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 2:09 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project On 05/28/2015 02:53 PM, Derek Higgins wrote: > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 05/28/2015 09:58 PM, Paul Belanger wrote: > Not sure I'm a fan of rdorpm, seems too specific to RDO and would not > foster other people using the git repo for packaging. Personally, I > simple say rpm- prefix, allowing for branches to be used for distro > specific changes. I full agree with tha

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 05/28/2015 02:53 PM, Derek Higgins wrote: > > > On 28/05/15 12:07, Jaume Devesa wrote: >> Hi Thomas, >> >> Delorean is a tool to build rpm packages from master branches (maybe any >> branch?) of OpenStack projects. >> >> Check out here: >> https://www.rdoproject.org/packaging/rdo-packaging.htm

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 05/28/2015 04:32 PM, Haïkel wrote: 2015-05-28 21:58 GMT+02:00 Paul Belanger : Personally, I'm a fan of mock. Is there plan to add support for it? Also, currently containers are not being used in -infra. Not saying it is a show stopper, but could see some initial planning that is required fo

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

2015-05-28 10:40 GMT+02:00 Thomas Goirand : > > I don't know delorean at all, but what should be kept in mind is that, > for Debian and Ubuntu, we *must* use sbuild, which is what is used on > the buildd networks. > > I also started working on openstack-pkg-tools to provide such sbuild > based buil

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

2015-05-28 21:58 GMT+02:00 Paul Belanger : > > Personally, I'm a fan of mock. Is there plan to add support for it? Also, > currently containers are not being used in -infra. Not saying it is a show > stopper, but could see some initial planning that is required for it. > > Nothing prevents us to

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

2015-05-27 23:26 GMT+02:00 Derek Higgins : > On 27/05/15 09:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: >> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- >> Hash: SHA256 >> >> Hi all, >> >> tl;dr: >> - - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on upstream >> gerrit with reviews. >> - - The intention is to bette

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 05/27/2015 05:26 PM, Derek Higgins wrote: On 27/05/15 09:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, tl;dr: - - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on upstream gerrit with reviews. - - The intention is to better share the workload, and

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 28/05/15 12:07, Jaume Devesa wrote: Hi Thomas, Delorean is a tool to build rpm packages from master branches (maybe any branch?) of OpenStack projects. Check out here: https://www.rdoproject.org/packaging/rdo-packaging.html#master-pkg-guide Following those instructions you'll notice that

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 05/28/2015 01:07 PM, Jaume Devesa wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > Delorean is a tool to build rpm packages from master branches > (maybe any branch?) of OpenStack projects. It's now also used for stable/kilo. I suspect all supported branches starting fr

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Hi Thomas, Delorean is a tool to build rpm packages from master branches (maybe any branch?) of OpenStack projects. Check out here: https://www.rdoproject.org/packaging/rdo-packaging.html#master-pkg-guide Regards, On Thu, 28 May 2015 10:40, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Derek, > > Thanks for what y

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Derek, Thanks for what you wrote. On 05/27/2015 11:26 PM, Derek Higgins wrote: >> 4. For deb packages you can create new repositories along side the >> rdorpm-* repositories My intention is to use deb-* as prefix, if Canonical team agrees. >> 5. Add deb support to delorean, I know of at least

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

On 27/05/15 09:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, tl;dr: - - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on upstream gerrit with reviews. - - The intention is to better share the workload, and improve the overall QA for packaging *and* up

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 05/27/2015 10:14 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Hi all, > > tl;dr: - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on > upstream gerrit with reviews. - The intention is to better share > the workload, and improve the overall QA for packaging

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Many thanks to Thomas and the other packagers for a great discussion at the summit and this fast follow-up, explained well. Looking forward to seeing what can be achieved! On 27/05/15 16:14, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Hi all, > > tl;dr: > - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on up

Re: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: [openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, tl;dr: - - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on upstream gerrit with reviews. - - The inte

[openstack-dev] [packaging] Adding packaging as an OpenStack project

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, tl;dr: - - We'd like to push distribution packaging of OpenStack on upstream gerrit with reviews. - - The intention is to better share the workload, and improve the overall QA for packaging *and* upstream. - - The goal is *not* to publish pa