On Mon, 15 Jul 2019, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:10 AM Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 15 Jul 2019, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
> > >
> > > If Octopus is really an LTS release like all the others, and you want
> > > bleeding edge users to test/use it and give early feedback, then Fedora
> > is
> > > probably one of the better places to get that feedback.
> >
> > I think the first release worth testing outside of the dev community is
> > the release candidate. I don't like the idea of having any distro carry
> > an untested dev checkpoint or else someone will lose data... even the rc
> > should be tested cautiously and, since it is only relevant for a week or
> > two, I'm not sure that distros can play much of a role there?
> >
>
> To be clear, when I talk about packaging a new version Ceph, it starts out
> by _only_ going into Fedora Rawhide. It would be extremely foolish, IMO,
> for anyone to run Rawhide for anything that's mission critical.
>
> Sometimes it takes a long time to work through build and packaging issues.
> The switch to gcc-8 and gcc-9 are good illustrations of the kinds of issues
> that we, as packagers, run into. Those kinds of things are why I — at least
> — like to get as early a start as I can. Even short-lived release
> candidates are useful stepping stones to the eventual GA.
>
> Personally I'd say that any fears anyone has of people losing data by using
> an early dev checkpoint of Ceph on Rawhide are probably a teeny bit
> misplaced.
Okay, it sounds like the rc x.1.z releases are a good fit, then. They
should start about ~2 months before the first stable release. I'm not so
sure about the dev checkpoints since they are quite arbitrary. I suspect
less effort would be needed to just do a manual build a few times
partway through the cycle (e.g., now), identify any issues, and open PRs
with build fixes.
sage
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx
