On Tue, 24 Jul 2018, Alfredo Deza wrote: > Hi all, > > After the 12.2.6 release went out, we've been thinking on better ways > to remove a version from our repositories to prevent users from > upgrading/installing a known bad release. > > The way our repos are structured today means every single version of > the release is included in the repository. That is, for Luminous, > every 12.x.x version of the binaries is in the same repo. This is true > for both RPM and DEB repositories. > > However, the DEB repos don't allow pinning to a given version because > our tooling (namely reprepro) doesn't construct the repositories in a > way that this is allowed. For RPM repos this is fine, and version > pinning works. > > To remove a bad version we have to proposals (and would like to hear > ideas on other possibilities), one that would involve symlinks and the > other one which purges the known bad version from our repos. > > *Symlinking* > When releasing we would have a "previous" and "latest" symlink that > would get updated as versions move forward. It would require > separation of versions at the URL level (all versions would no longer > be available in one repo). > > The URL structure would then look like: > > debian/luminous/12.2.3/ > debian/luminous/previous/ (points to 12.2.5) > debian/luminous/latest/ (points to 12.2.7) > > Caveats: the url structure would change from debian-luminous/ to > prevent breakage, and the versions would be split. For RPMs it would > mean a regression if someone is used to pinning, for example pinning > to 12.2.2 wouldn't be possible using the same url. > > Pros: Faster release times, less need to move packages around, and > easier to remove a bad version I think the core question is: how many users use or depend on the version-pinning features with RPMs. The symlinking path is easy to implement but breaks that ability... you have to change the repo URL to pin to a release. (Nobody is doing version pinning with debs because our reprepro repos don't support it.) In the future we can always move to the multi-version repos and maintain the per-version repos in parallel, right? Thanks! sage > > > *Single version removal* > Our tooling would need to go and remove the known bad version from the > repository, which would require to rebuild the repository again, so > that the metadata is updated with the difference in the binaries. > > Caveats: time intensive process, almost like cutting a new release > which takes about a day (and sometimes longer). Error prone since the > process wouldn't be the same (one off, just when a version needs to be > removed) > > Pros: all urls for download.ceph.com and its structure are kept the same. > _______________________________________________ > 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
 |