Bug#784373: [Ceph-maintainers] Bug#784373: jessie-pu: package ceph/0.80.9-2 (pre approval)
Hi,
The home page of the Ceph stable release team is http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases. The details of the process are at http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/wiki/HOWTO.
You can get information about the testing done on a particular firefly release by browsing the corresponding tracker issues[1].
The firefly v0.80.10 release details are at http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/11090
I hope that helps :-)
Cheers
[1] firefly backport testing http://tracker.ceph.com/projects/ceph-releases/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&set_filter=1&f[]=subject&op[subject]=~&v[subject][]=firefly&f[]=&c[]=project&c[]=tracker&c[]=status&c[]=priority&c[]=subject&c[]=assigned_to&c[]=updated_on&c[]=category&c[]=fixed_version&c[]=cf_3&group_by=
On 05/01/2016 22:47, Gregory Farnum wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Gaudenz Steinlin <gaudenz@debian.org> wrote:
>> [ CCing the upstream package maintainers list ]
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> writes:
>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 22:57:27 +0200, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi debian-release
>>>>
>>>> Gaudenz Steinlin <gaudenz@debian.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Gaudenz Steinlin <gaudenz@debian.org> writes:
>>>>>> I'd like to update ceph in jessie to the latest upstream bugfix release.
>>>>>> The version of ceph in jessie is a long term support (LTS) release which
>>>>>> will receive updates at least until January 2016. Updates will be bugfix
>>>>>> only. New features go into new release which are developed in parallel.
>>>>>> See at the end of this report for the upstream changelog.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See http://ceph.com/docs/master/releases/ for the ceph release timeline
>>>>>> and support statement.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Just as an additional data point, Ubuntu has a "Minor Release Exception"
>>>>> for stable updates for their ceph package [1].
>>>> In the meantime another stable point release of ceph 0.80 (0.80.10) was
>>>> released and on top of that there is a (minor) security issue which
>>>> won't be fixed through a security update but which would be nice to fix
>>>> by a stable update (see bug #798567 / CVE-2015-5245)).
>>>>
>>>> As another stable update has passed, it would be nice if someone of the
>>>> stable release team could comment on this and eventually decide if they
>>>> are OK with the proposal to follow the ceph stable branch or if they
>>>> don't like it and would prefer an update just fixing the security bug.
>>>> It would be nice to have a decision soon, so that there is enough time
>>>> to prepare and test the update for the next stable point release.
>>>>
>>> What does the QA process on upstream's bugfix releases, and on the
>>> Debian side for the proposed stable updates, look like?
>> The QA processes on the upstream side are quite extensive. They run
>> integration and upgrade tests on a regular basis. They use their test
>> framework theutology[1] for these tests. Their QA configuration is
>> available in the ceph-qa-suite repository [2].
>>
>> Unfortunately it's not easy to see how this testing is actually done and
>> if the tests all pass at release time. Maybe someone from upstream Ceph
>> can shed some more light on this and explain things in more detail. Some
>> test results can be seen on Pulpito [3] but it's not clear to me how
>> these results relate to actual releases.
> We have some "gitbuilders" running on debian which you can see at
> http://ceph.com/gitbuilder.cgi. Those build the source debs and run
> "make check", which includes unit tests and some very simple running
> cluster tests.
>
> The stable releases and QA teams do affirmative checks to make sure
> that all their releases are passing every test prior to tagging. Those
> records are available in Redmine tracker tickets; I've added Loïc who
> leads that effort and can speak more about it.
> -Greg
>
>> The QA on the Debian side is not as extensive. My resources are limited,
>> but I do run my builds on my own test infrastructure. But I expect the
>> changes to the Debian packaging side to be fairly minimal.
>>
>>> So far I'm leaning towards rejecting this request, as I don't want to
>>> spend that much time reviewing these changes, and as you see we're
>>> already way behind on stable update requests.
>> I don't think it's reasonable to expect the release team to review the
>> upstream changes. If you don't trust them enough to not break things,
>> then we should not upgrade the package. On the other hand other major
>> Linux distribution do trust them enough as I wrote in my initial
>> request.
>>
>> If you agree to do these stable updates they have to be done in a
>> similar way to the postgres and linux kernel updates. I don't think the
>> release team or any Debian developer reviews all upstream changes there.
>> So it's really a matter of trust.
>>
>> Upstream also provides their own Debian packages which are always
>> updated to the latest bugfix point releases. I guess many users use
>> these packages instead of the packages from Debian because they are
>> up to date wrt bugfix releases. IMO this is sad as I think Debian should
>> aim at providing the most useful experience out of the box without 3rd
>> party repositories.
>>
>> Gaudenz
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/ceph/teuthology
>> [2] https://github.com/ceph/ceph-qa-suite/tree/firefly
>> [3] http://pulpito.ceph.com/?branch=firefly
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ceph-maintainers mailing list
>> Ceph-maintainers@lists.ceph.com
>> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-maintainers-ceph.com
>>
--
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
Reply to: