[vdsm] branching out 4.1.2
Hi all, patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523) The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should expect quite few double backports. Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects. Bests, -- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi all,
patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523)
Aren't we releasing 4.1.2 tomorrow? Why branching now?
The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should expect quite few double backports.
Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects.
Bests,
-- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- SANDRO BONAZZOLA ASSOCIATE MANAGER, SOFTWARE ENGINEERING, EMEA ENG VIRTUALIZATION R&D Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com/> <https://red.ht/sig> TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted>
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi all,
patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523)
The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should expect quite few double backports.
Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects.
+1
Bests,
-- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi all,
patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523)
The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should expect quite few double backports.
Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects.
1. Go for it. 2. Let's see what the outcome is. How many 'merge races' we have, how many regressions (hopefully none), how much work is poured into it, so we'll learn from the future if we should branch sooner or is it OK to wait - and until when. Y.
Bests,
-- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi all,
patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523)
The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should expect quite few double backports.
Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects.
1. Go for it. 2. Let's see what the outcome is. How many 'merge races' we have, how many regressions (hopefully none), how much work is poured into it,
Do you want for the new branch full CI coverage? Just branching takes a few seconds, and almost no resources (except for mental ones, in developers' minds). CI takes more time and more resources.
so we'll learn from the future if we should branch sooner or is it OK to wait - and until when.
We had recently a private discussion about this, with no final conclusion AFAIR. I suggested (and repeat now) to fully automate this - so that project maintainers have in the gerrit UI checkboxes for CI per branch. This definitely takes time, and was considered not worth it, with the assumption that if we do our work well, we almost never need z branches - that we should aim to push and merge almost all the patches for some z version right after z-1 was released, and not postpone this to later on, when we already want to work on z+1 - and those late-comers that do want/need a branch should verify their patches manually and not need CI.
Y.
Bests,
-- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- Didi
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Yedidyah Bar David <didi@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi all,
patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523)
The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should expect quite few double backports.
Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects.
1. Go for it. 2. Let's see what the outcome is. How many 'merge races' we have, how
many
regressions (hopefully none), how much work is poured into it,
Do you want for the new branch full CI coverage?
I don't think it should, since the stable branch which is a superset of it should all the patches as well and will fail before backporting to the new branch. Yes, there might be rare occasions where a patch will fail on version branch and not stable branch, I'm not sure its worth the effort of duplicating all CI resources per branch just for it. We already don't cover all flows in CI because there are limited resources, so I don't see a huge difference here. We can always run verification on the final bits via manual job before releasing to catch such cases.
Just branching takes a few seconds, and almost no resources (except for mental ones, in developers' minds). CI takes more time and more resources.
so we'll learn from the future if we should branch sooner or is it OK to wait - and until when.
We had recently a private discussion about this, with no final conclusion AFAIR. I suggested (and repeat now) to fully automate this - so that project maintainers have in the gerrit UI checkboxes for CI per branch. This definitely takes time, and was considered not worth it, with the assumption that if we do our work well, we almost never need z branches - that we should aim to push and merge almost all the patches for some z version right after z-1 was released, and not postpone this to later on, when we already want to work on z+1 - and those late-comers that do want/need a branch should verify their patches manually and not need CI.
Y.
Bests,
-- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- Didi _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- Eyal edri ASSOCIATE MANAGER RHV DevOps EMEA VIRTUALIZATION R&D Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com/> <https://red.ht/sig> TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted> phone: +972-9-7692018 irc: eedri (on #tlv #rhev-dev #rhev-integ)
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------27E0ADBF61E3BA881C5FCF40 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 05/22/2017 12:32 PM, Eyal Edri wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Yedidyah Bar David <didi@redhat.com <mailto:didi@redhat.com>> wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul@redhat.com <mailto:ykaul@redhat.com>> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com <mailto:fromani@redhat.com>> > wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about >> branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523) >> >> The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should >> expect quite few double backports. >> >> >> Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects. > > > 1. Go for it. > 2. Let's see what the outcome is. How many 'merge races' we have, how many > regressions (hopefully none), how much work is poured into it,
Do you want for the new branch full CI coverage?
I don't think it should, since the stable branch which is a superset of it should all the patches as well and will fail before backporting to the new branch.
Yes, there might be rare occasions where a patch will fail on version branch and not stable branch, I'm not sure its worth the effort of duplicating all CI resources per branch just for it. We already don't cover all flows in CI because there are limited resources, so I don't see a huge difference here.
We can always run verification on the final bits via manual job before releasing to catch such cases.
I agree with Eyal. Furthermore 4.1.2 is released, so I expect low-to-none activity on that ovirt-4.1.2 branch. The merging activity on the branch ovirt-4.1 resumed, the merge window is now open again for 4.1.3. Bests, -- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh --------------27E0ADBF61E3BA881C5FCF40 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> On 05/22/2017 12:32 PM, Eyal Edri wrote:<br> <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CACuV_Hq6yg6qjDuhhf+5xnO7HL5jFxHKM_4ouYpK0RAuzpNw_g@mail.gmail.com"> <div dir="ltr"><br> <div class="gmail_extra"><br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Yedidyah Bar David <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:didi@redhat.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">didi@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Yaniv Kaul <<a href="mailto:ykaul@redhat.com" moz-do-not-send="true">ykaul@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br> ><br> ><br> > On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Francesco Romani <<a href="mailto:fromani@redhat.com" moz-do-not-send="true">fromani@redhat.com</a>><br> > wrote:<br> >><br> >> Hi all,<br> >><br> >><br> >> patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about<br> >> branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523)<br> >><br> >> The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should<br> >> expect quite few double backports.<br> >><br> >><br> >> Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects.<br> ><br> ><br> > 1. Go for it.<br> > 2. Let's see what the outcome is. How many 'merge races' we have, how many<br> > regressions (hopefully none), how much work is poured into it,<br> <br> </span>Do you want for the new branch full CI coverage? </blockquote> <div><br> </div> <div>I don't think it should, since the stable branch which is a superset of it should all the patches as well and will fail</div> <div>before backporting to the new branch.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Yes, there might be rare occasions where a patch will fail on version branch and not stable branch,</div> <div>I'm not sure its worth the effort of duplicating all CI resources per branch just for it.</div> <div>We already don't cover all flows in CI because there are limited resources, so I don't see a huge difference here.</div> <div><br> </div> <div>We can always run verification on the final bits via manual job before releasing to catch such cases. <br> </div> </div> </div> </div> </blockquote> <br> I agree with Eyal. Furthermore 4.1.2 is released, so I expect low-to-none activity on that ovirt-4.1.2 branch.<br> The merging activity on the branch ovirt-4.1 resumed, the merge window is now open again for 4.1.3.<br> <br> Bests,<br> <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh</pre> </body> </html> --------------27E0ADBF61E3BA881C5FCF40--
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com> wrote:
On 05/22/2017 12:32 PM, Eyal Edri wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Yedidyah Bar David <didi@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul@redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi all,
patches against the 4.1 branch are piling up, so I'm thinking about branching out 4.1.2 tomorrow (20170523)
The activity on the 4.1.2 front was quite low lately, so we should expect quite few double backports.
Thoughts? I'll go forward and branch if noone objects.
1. Go for it. 2. Let's see what the outcome is. How many 'merge races' we have, how
many
regressions (hopefully none), how much work is poured into it,
Do you want for the new branch full CI coverage?
I don't think it should, since the stable branch which is a superset of it should all the patches as well and will fail before backporting to the new branch.
Yes, there might be rare occasions where a patch will fail on version branch and not stable branch, I'm not sure its worth the effort of duplicating all CI resources per branch just for it. We already don't cover all flows in CI because there are limited resources, so I don't see a huge difference here.
We can always run verification on the final bits via manual job before releasing to catch such cases.
I agree with Eyal. Furthermore 4.1.2 is released, so I expect low-to-none activity on that ovirt-4.1.2 branch. The merging activity on the branch ovirt-4.1 resumed, the merge window is now open again for 4.1.3.
+1. Also, one thing we can consider for next time is to allow merging earlier on stable branch and if we see that we still need patches for 4.1.2, we can always create a new branch from the latest tag for 4.1.2.
Bests,
-- Francesco Romani Senior SW Eng., Virtualization R&D Red Hat IRC: fromani github: @fromanirh
_______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-- Eyal edri ASSOCIATE MANAGER RHV DevOps EMEA VIRTUALIZATION R&D Red Hat EMEA <https://www.redhat.com/> <https://red.ht/sig> TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED. <https://redhat.com/trusted> phone: +972-9-7692018 irc: eedri (on #tlv #rhev-dev #rhev-integ)
participants (6)
-
Eyal Edri -
Francesco Romani -
Nir Soffer -
Sandro Bonazzola -
Yaniv Kaul -
Yedidyah Bar David