Re: [Engine-devel] ovirt-engine deployment method

On 04/18/2012 12:18 PM, Livnat Peer wrote: > On 18/04/12 12:42, Juan Hernandez wrote: >> On 04/18/2012 11:17 AM, Livnat Peer wrote: >>> On 17/04/12 16:20, Ofer Schreiber wrote: >>>> As decided earlier, oVirt next release (3.1) is targeted for Fedora 17. >>>> Since the engine uses JBoss, we have two deployment options: >>>> 1. Continue working with ovirt-engine-jbossas package >>>> PROS: Single rpm. known upgrade method. >>>> CONS: Maintaining un-natural zip based rpm. No official support. Can't be pushed into Fedora. >>>> >>>> 2. Move to JBoss F17 official packages: >>>> PROS: Fully supported F17 rpms (including bug fixes, security fixes, etc). "The right thing to do". >>>> CONS: Upgrade from first release (relaying on old jboss) will be almost impossible, Some open issues (will it work just as as normal service? or will we need to code a new one?), Might cause a delay to Feature Freeze. >>>> >>>> Thought? Comments? >>> >>> I think it is too soon to move to the Jboss packaged for Fedora17. >>> It was just packaged and I am not aware of any developer actually >>> working with oVirt on the Jboss packaged for Fedora (except for one). >>> I expect to at least have the developers working with this Jboss for a >>> while before releasing on it. >>> >>> Can anyone provide info on how different is Jboss for Fedora than the >>> current upstream Jboss we use? >> >> The main difference is that the version being packaged for Fedora 17 >> contains a subset of the modules: those needed for the web profile >> except Hibernate. In addition the main configuration file is also >> different: standalone-web.xml instead of standalone.xml. Additional >> modules will be added as needed. Eventually all the modules available >> upstream will be available in the Fedora packaging, but that will take time. >> >> With the currently available packages ovirt-engine 3.0 can run correctly >> (only backend and restapi, not the frontend). It needs changes, but it >> can run, and most of those changes are not really related to the >> differences in jboss-as, but to the differences in other packages like >> quartz, resteasy, jackson, spring, etc. I believe that the same applies >> to 3.1. > > Maybe for 3.1 we should change upstream to use the same Jar versions as > we use in the Fedora deployment. That would take us one step closer to a > parity version. That would be great! There are some changes that could help with that: http://gerrit.ovirt.org/3250 - Update to Quartz 2.1 http://gerrit.ovirt.org/3251 - Update to Jackson 1.9.2 http://gerrit.ovirt.org/1390 - Remove Spring from RESTAPI http://gerrit.ovirt.org/3002 - Update to Spring 3 http://gerrit.ovirt.org/2347 - Add methods missing in PGHack http://gerrit.ovirt.org/2354 - Don't require activation http://gerrit.ovirt.org/3249 - Remove dependency on JNA http://gerrit.ovirt.org/3086 - Replace pubkey2ssh with ssh-keygen Some of them still need work from the author ;-)

>> In order for a ovirt developer to use the Fedora packaging it will need >> a lot of additional modules and tools, specially for the frontend, that >> are not currently available in Fedora 17. If we wait for that then we >> should re-target for Fedora 18. > > Is that mean that our next release, if we use Jboss packaged in Fedora, > will not include UI? No, I didn't explain it correctly, sorry. It means the the "official" ovirt-engine package included in Fedora 17 can't contain the UI (because GWT is not in Fedora 17 yet). But the "unofficial" ovirt-engine package can include it, and the official jboss-as package should be enough to run the it.

>> My opinion is that we should use the Fedora 17 packages for deployment, >> independently of what we use for development. It is challenging, but I >> believe is "the right thing to do". > > Juan, thank you for the detailed answer. > > I suggest that for the upcoming release we'll do both, have 2 release > flavors, one RPM's like we released for 3.0 (with Jboss included) and > the other one tailored for Fedora. My suggestion is that even if we decide to have two flavors of the ovirt-engine packages (the official one without the UI and the unofficial one with the UI) both should use the official jboss-as package.