[Pulp-dev] New pulpcore release (3.3.1?)

David Davis daviddavis at redhat.com
Wed May 6 16:36:09 UTC 2020


After our meeting today with Katello, we decided to release a 3.3.1 release
this week with just https://pulp.plan.io/issues/6565 which is currently
blocking them. There is a large backlog of fixes for 3.3 that probably
cannot be cleanly picked onto the 3.3 branch. Moreover, we are coming up
soon on our next monthly y-release (3.4).

David


On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 8:10 AM Brian Bouterse <bmbouter at redhat.com> wrote:

> When I look at the all_task_dispatched ticket I see a feature; the
> TaskGroup not being in the plugin API I can see as a bug. If we release a
> feature I think it would need to be 3.4.0. This is inconvenient I know, but
> my concern is that if a feature gets released in Z stream even with good
> intentions, we put the semver commitment and transitively the trust of our
> users at risk. I agree completely that these changes must be released and
> soon.
>
> What about dis-including all_task_dispatched from a 3.3.1? I
> believe @daviddavis identified this gap and it was theoretical**. Katello
> could workaround by polling any migration a bit longer even when it shows
> completed. This would give many benefits: we can stay true to semver,
> katello can use the workaround to poll linger, and a low-risk 3.3.1 would
> be created without requiring everything to release for compatibility
> reasons. What do others think about this approach?
>
> To unpack my mental model for this classification into feature versus bug,
> I try to determine if there is a claim of usability already present. If
> there is, then it's a bug; if there isn't then it's a feature.
>
> **: I don't mean this negatively. It's only an observation that it has not
> been experienced in practice
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 5, 2020 at 10:07 AM Tatiana Tereshchenko <ttereshc at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> +1 for 3.3.1
>>
>> Could those be included?
>> 1. Adding TaskGroup to the plugin API
>> https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore/pull/677
>> 2. Adding all_task_dispatched field to indicate that no more tasks will
>> spawn https://github.com/pulp/pulpcore/pull/682
>>
>> They may sound like features/improvements however, without both, task
>> groups are close to unusable.
>> Katello integrates with pulpcore 3.3 and migration plugin which uses task
>> groups.
>> Migration plugin can workaround the first problem by importing directly
>> from the pulpcore.
>> Without #2, there is no way to know whether all tasks have been
>> dispatched or not, it means no way to know the overall state of the
>> migration.
>>
>> To my knowledge, task groups are used by import/export (which is in tech
>> preview) and by the migration plugin. So those PRs seem to me like a
>> low-risk change.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tanya
>>
>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 8:41 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think Katello would like a few of the bug fixes from the past couple
>>> weeks. Would a 3.3.1 release make sense? Would anyone have time this week
>>> to work on it?
>>>
>>> David
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20200506/744831fa/attachment.htm>


More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list