oVirt 3.1 targeted release platform

[Andrew Cathrow]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Burns" <mburns at redhat.com>
> To: "Ofer Schreiber" <oschreib at redhat.com>
> Cc: arch at ovirt.org
> Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2012 12:11:58 PM
> Subject: Re: oVirt 3.1 targeted release platform
> 
> On Wed, 2012-04-04 at 12:00 -0400, Ofer Schreiber wrote:
> > As discussed today in oVirt sync meeting
> > (http://ovirt.org/meetings/ovirt/2012/ovirt.2012-04-04-15.01.log.html),
> > upstream VDSM doesn't work anymore on Fedora 16 due to a missing
> > libvirt dependency.
> > 
> > This issue raises an important question - which platform we're
> > trying to target?
> > Since oVirt is a (very) layered product, I think we can't avoid
> > setting a target platform for every oVirt release, and keep all
> > the different components aligned with it.
> > 
> > Getting back to the next release- I'm suggesting Fedora 17 as our
> > common platform.
> > According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/17/Schedule,
> > Fedora 17 release date is the 15th of May, which align with the
> > schedule for oVirt 3.1 (www.ovirt.org/wiki/Second_Release).
> 
> We should definitely settle on one recommended option for the
> release.
> Going to F17 completely is one option, but there are a couple others.
> 
> There is a virt-preview repo that contains newer version of some
> virtualization components.  So things like the newest libvirt would
> be
> available on F16.  We can still support F16 and just require this be
> available.  This may work, but it opens us up to possible problems
> with
> f17 packages not working quite right on f16.

virt-preview is currently not maintained and hasn't been updated for over a month

> 
> We can pull the F17 packages into our own ovirt.org repo as a hybrid
> repo of f16+selected f17 packages.  This has a similar issue in that
> we
> could run into problems with F17 packages on F16.
> 
> IMHO, I think we should just move completely to F17.  There is risk
> that
> F17 doesn't ship when they plan to, or that we hit issues with other
> F17
> packages that we're not expecting.  There is also the question of
> upgrades.  Everything is F16 based now, if we require f17, what is
> the
> upgrade path.

It's early days for F17, but if we require virt packages that aren't in F16 (or the last virt-preview update) then we might need to.
> 
> One other thing to consider is whether we can support Engine running
> on
> F16 or F17 since it doesn't need vdsm running locally and require F17
> on
> ovirt-node or Fedora vdsm hosts.
> 
> Mike
> 
> > 
> > Thought/Comments?
> > 
> > Ofer Schreiber
> > oVirt Release Manager
> > _______________________________________________
> > Arch mailing list
> > Arch at ovirt.org
> > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Arch mailing list
> Arch at ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
>