Isn't marking something as deprecated meaning that there is a better option that we want you to use and you should switch to it sooner than later? I don't understand how this is ready to be marked as such if ceph-volume can't be switched to for all supported use cases. If ZFS, encryption, FreeBSD, etc are all going to be supported under ceph-volume, then how can ceph-disk be deprecated before ceph-volume can support them? I can imagine many Ceph admins wasting time chasing an erroneous deprecated warning because it came out before the new solution was mature enough to replace the existing solution.
On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 9:26 AM Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 28-11-2017 13:32, Alfredo Deza wrote:
>
> I understand that this would involve a significant effort to fully
> port over and drop ceph-disk entirely, and I don't think that dropping
> ceph-disk in Mimic is set in stone (yet).
Alfredo,
When I expressed my concers about deprecating ceph-disk, I was led to
beleive that I had atleast two release cycles to come up with something
of a 'ceph-volume zfs ....'
Reading this, there is a possibility that it will get dropped IN mimic?
Which means that there is less than 1 release cycle to get it working?
Thanx,
--WjW
_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list
ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
