<div dir="ltr">The initial RC will be distributed via PyPI only. The plan is to work on RPM packaging (and maybe debian/Ubuntu?) between the RC and the GA. I think your idea makes sense though once we ship OS-specific packaging.<div><div><div dir="ltr" class="m_-7043848883530299409gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div> </div><div>David </div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div> </div></div> <div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 7:38 AM Bryan Kearney <<a href="mailto:bkearney@redhat.com" target="_blank">bkearney@redhat.com</a>> wrote: </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Do you plan to distribute rpms/.debs? If so, instead of using the term supported you can instead deal with it via how you distribute: * Only generate native artifacts for the distros you test * Generate pip/egg files and then it is up to the user to deploy wherever. -- bk On 9/19/18 4:06 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 3:55 PM Dana Walker <<a href="mailto:dawalker@redhat.com" target="_blank">dawalker@redhat.com</a> > <mailto:<a href="mailto:dawalker@redhat.com" target="_blank">dawalker@redhat.com</a>>> wrote: > > I agree with Brian 100% that if we say something is officially > supported, we need to back that statement up, be that with Travis or > some other level of testing, or bugfix support, etc. > > Looking at the multi-os docs for Travis that Brian linked to, it > looks like it's only two options, Linux or OSX, and as he said Linux > currently just means Ubuntu, and OSX may face some hurdles. > > That is right, but what we could do is have Travis be a loading > environment for a docker container that is loaded from dockerhub. With > that approach I think we can test Fedoras, CentOS, and maybe even RHEL > on Travis. I know other people do this I can link to some examples if > people want to look at it more closely. I think this is one reason why > Travis doesn't offer more runtimes since you can get others through > containers. OSX is special though because it can't be containerized so > they have to offer that one. RQ can't run on Windows so we can't run > there at all :( > > I think we should explore putting ^ CI in place before we take Pulp3 > after the 3.0 RC but before the GA. > > > > Are there other forms of testing we would be willing and able to use > to be able to officially back more OS's? I'd really like to see > more broad support. At the very least, yes, we can list that it > should work on a number of others and that we develop in Fedora, but > certainly we can test in more OS's to a level of confidence to count > as official support, right? > > As for documentation, David, what sort of questions have you been > getting about it? I mean, we have documentation. I know we can > likely improve it, or at least the visibility of it as a recent > review suggested. Is there a particular area of concern that we > could address? > > Thanks, > > --Dana > > Dana Walker > > Associate Software Engineer > > Red Hat > > <<a href="https://www.redhat.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com</a>> > > <<a href="https://red.ht/sig" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://red.ht/sig</a>> > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 3:02 PM, Brian Bouterse <<a href="mailto:bbouters@redhat.com" target="_blank">bbouters@redhat.com</a> > <mailto:<a href="mailto:bbouters@redhat.com" target="_blank">bbouters@redhat.com</a>>> wrote: > > I want to advocate we follow the policy even for Fedora. We can > anecdotally say in the distribution docs that we use Fedora in > our development environment and that we expect it to work there too. > > Without CI it's hard to know on an everyday basis which specific > versions of a distribution are working. For instance with > Fedora, even with dev environments, it's possible that we aren't > booting into both F27 and F28 often enough and Pulp break from a > dependency change. With CI running for the supported OS's, we'll > know almost as fast as our users do when there is an issue on a > supported OS. I think this is part of the "supported OS" value > proposition. It allows us to be very precise on exactly which > versions are being continuously tested on, down to the specific > versions. > > Other/more ideas are welcome. > > > > On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 1:19 PM David Davis > <<a href="mailto:daviddavis@redhat.com" target="_blank">daviddavis@redhat.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:daviddavis@redhat.com" target="_blank">daviddavis@redhat.com</a>>> wrote: > > What about Fedora? We use it in our development environment > so I think I would feel comfortable claiming official > support for it as well it’s not in our CI environment. > > Other than that, your proposal sounds good to me. > > David > > > On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 12:02 PM Brian Bouterse > <<a href="mailto:bbouters@redhat.com" target="_blank">bbouters@redhat.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bbouters@redhat.com" target="_blank">bbouters@redhat.com</a>>> wrote: > > Here is what makes sense to me. Let's have Pulp claim > official support for any distro that we have CI for > (Travis). This ensures every pull request change and > nightlies are tested and provable on all supported > distros. I believe support is about provable testing so > without CI we can't ensure it in an ongoing way > otherwise. Additionally though, we should say that Pulp > will likely run anywhere that has the Python 3.6 runtime > and has all necessary dependencies, which likely > includes MacOS, Debian, etc. From a practical > perspective Pulp likely will run well on all these > distros, so even though we wouldn't claim formal > support, our users probably aren't limited much in-practice. > > The only strange thing with ^ approach is that currently > Travis only tests on Ubuntu so we would not be able to > claim additional support until we started testing other > distros in containers on Travis (totally do-able) [0]. > I'm ok w/ that though. > > What do you all think? > > [0]: <a href="https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/multi-os/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/multi-os/</a> > > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 1:52 PM, David Davis > <<a href="mailto:daviddavis@redhat.com" target="_blank">daviddavis@redhat.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:daviddavis@redhat.com" target="_blank">daviddavis@redhat.com</a>>> > wrote: > > Our last Pulp 3.0 planning ended a bit early a few > weeks ago and there were a few outstanding questions > that I would like to bring up on list for discussion > and get some feedback. > > The first is around which OSes we are supporting and > what will support include (testing on the OS, fixing > platform-specific bugs, etc). We identified CentOS > and Fedora as having official support. Then we also > said we would support MacOS, Debian, and Ubuntu. > Some confirmation and clarification on which OSes we > are supporting and what support will mean would be > good. Does anyone have any thoughts? > > Secondly, I just wanted to confirm that for the RC, > we are planning on providing only Python packages > via PyPI. I imagine we’ll work on providing other > packaging formats like RPMs after the RC but before > the GA. > > Lastly, there were some questions around what level > of documentation we’re planning on having for the > release. I’m not sure of a good way to address this > and am looking for feedback. > > Thanks. > > David > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > <a href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com" target="_blank">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com" target="_blank">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a>> > <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev</a> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > <a href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com" target="_blank">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com" target="_blank">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a>> > <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev</a> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > <a href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com" target="_blank">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a> > <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev</a> > _______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list <a href="mailto:Pulp-dev@redhat.com" target="_blank">Pulp-dev@redhat.com</a> <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev</a> </blockquote></div>