Re: Adopting OpenStack packages
On 03/06/2017 12:15 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
> There are lots of good reasons for that. I think most importantly is that if
> a last minute RC bug were to pop up, no one wants to have to figure out (or
> worse, debug) a new maintenance workflow in order to fix that critical
> problem.
If such thing happened, I don't think it's such a huge issue to just fix
the RC bug and upload, then figure out how to commit later on. Because
of the freeze, the change will be minimal anyway.
> But that only gates flag day. Any switch of this nature requires a lot of
> work before flag day. Look at the switch from svn to git, Stefano did a huge
> amount of testing and development to get us to that point, with lots of test
> migrations, feedback, etc. Kudos to him for the tenacity and dedication to
> the team on that.
A huge +1 for the kudos to Stefano and yourself for this indeed.
> Let's look at the switch from git-dpm as an example. We *know* there are
> challenges in that conversion; I've experimented with it as have others, and
> it's not a trivial operation. So we need one or a few dedicated people to
> investigate all the technical details of such a switch. What are the steps
> needed to convert an individual package? How and when will we convert all
> team packages? What exactly will the new workflow look like? Does the wiki
> page accurate describe all the common tasks that team members will need to
> perform? Is there a test conversion that people can try out? Where are the
> scripts to do the conversion so others can contribute? What is the process
> for providing and addressing feedback as people test it? What's the timeline,
> and when is flag day?
I agree it's not trivial.
> I think one of the problems specifically with getting rid of git-dpm is that,
> while the tool is deprecated and there are known problems, it actually kind of
> works pretty well for us. svn clearly was breaking down, but from a global
> team point of view, git-dpm is still almost good enough, so the urgency to
> switch hasn't been there.
Here, I don't agree. but YMMV, I guess. Maybe there's no point
discussing the urgency! :)
> But we need volunteers to say "I am going to do the hard work to
> make the conversion happen". And of course we're all busy, and it's a
> thankless job (but thank you Stefano for your previous work!). So that's why,
> IMHO, the git-dpm conversion hasn't happened yet.
>
> If we're just not going to find the round tuits to do the conversion before
> then, this would make for a very suitable collaboration for a team Debconf
> sprint.
I'm hereby volunteering for such a sprint (if I hopefully make it to
Montreal). Hopefully, migrating from git-dpm to git-pq wont be as hard
as from SVN to Git.
> CI/CD, automated testing, etc. cannot just happen by fiat. They may be great
> ideas we can adopt, but *a lot* of hard work and dedicated time goes into
> making sure the technology can handle things, but also, and more importantly
> IMHO to make sure that everyone on the team knows how it works, understands
> and can help debug any problems, knows where the well-written documentation
> is, etc. We need dedicated people to help people on IRC and email when they
> get stuck or have a problem. And we have to consider the needs of those for
> whom contribution to DPMT is not a full-time job.
I already talked and wrote about it, I would very much like a packaging
CI/CD to be deployed for Debian. However, I'm scared to attempt doing it
by myself only. I don't want to become a single point of failure.
Cheers,
Thomas Goirand (zigo)
Reply to: