Hi, > On 5. Feb 2025, at 16:04, Gregory Farnum <gfarnum@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi all, > We in the Ceph Steering Committee are discussing when we want to > target the Tentacle release for, as we find ourselves in an unusual > scheduling situation: > * Historically, we have targeted our major release in early Spring. I > believe this was initially aligned to the Ubuntu LTS release. (With > cephadm and containerization I'm not sure this is particularly > relevant any more?) We run Ceph with custom compiled packages on NixOS and aren’t particularly worried about distribution timing. However, this is due to us currently lagging A LOT due to having been bitten previously again and again with unstable majors. So, we’re currently on Nautilus, starting to upgrade on Pacific this spring and might be ready to move to Squid in Fall. I *LIKE* being flexible of which packages to include, independent of the underlying distribution. As a side note: NixOS tries to be very support-focused, so there is a part of the community that would like to not even include a package if it runs EOL during a distro’s release cycle. However, that’s only 6 months and Ceph generally supports longer cycles, so that should work out for the general population just fine. > * Unfortunately, due to issues in the sepia lab and with testing > infrastructure, we had big slips on Reef (August), and we tried to get > Squid back on track but it ended up slipping farther (September). > * The sepia lab needs to physically move this year out of the current > Red Hat community hosting area in to a new lab (hosted by IBM). We're > not sure how disruptive this will be, but it will definitely require > changes as our current tests are somewhat dependent on the shape of > the underlying hardware, which is changing. > * There are not many major features available yet. Major upcoming > features include the fast EC code, userspace and management support > for cephfs encryption, and RBD mirroring groups. Different parts of > these are coming throughout the calendar year but we don't have firm > timetables yet. Yeah, looking at the subset that we use, we’d like to do better staying up to date but not particularly focused on new features, rather stability and operability. RFC 1925, Point 1. ;) (Online reshaping of EC pools, anyone? *cough*) > We have basically discarded attempting to do an early spring release, > since there doesn't seem to be much point. The obvious options are > 1) Do a fall release, targeting 12 months after Squid (so, late > September, with a freeze in early July). > 2) Wait until early spring 2026, with a freeze in January. > (This doesn't preclude other options as we gather more input, but we > are starting with these for discussion.) I’d be happy with this as it gives us more time (and motivation) to catch up. To repeat on our goals: I’d rather have smaller, well-tested releases that provide a smooth upgrade path. Taking care of the testing infrastructure is a big part of that IMHO, so I’d applaud you to take the time to do it with sufficient attention to detail and not try to push out a release while juggling that. Christian -- Christian Theune · ct@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx · +49 345 219401 0 Flying Circus Internet Operations GmbH · https://flyingcircus.io Leipziger Str. 70/71 · 06108 Halle (Saale) · Deutschland HR Stendal HRB 21169 · Geschäftsführer: Christian Theune, Christian Zagrodnick _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx
 |