fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Dmitry Borodaenko <dborodaenko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:11 AM, Mike Scherbakov
<mscherbakov@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "confusing versioning in OpenStack patching" - if we didn't change puppet
> manifests and Fuel/OpenStack reference architecture in next Fuel versions,
> then it would be as simple as patching from 5.0 to 5.1. But it appeared to
> be more complicated system than you would initially think of, so in general
> 5.0.2 may not be equal to 5.1, that's where all things come up. If we had
> OpenStack upgrades, then we could just say 5.0 -> 6.0 - easy.

We may have had technical reasons to make this decision, but it still
is confusing and negatively impacts UX. I agree that having an
incomplete feature early is better than not having it at all until
much later, as long as we don't stop working on it until it's complete
and these small but annoying deficiencies are addressed. Our
experience with technical debt so far is not very reassuring.

> "issues with containers" - we have same issues with everything. Let's take
> Galera, for example. It's just issues. We can question maturity of tools we
> use, and here I'd agree - we spent too much fixing issues around Docker. At
> the same time, if we were about taking our own journey with LXC, we would
> likely spend even more time inventing our own bicycle.

You're assuming that it was just Docker as a piece of software that is
the primary cause of all our troubles with Fuel upgrades. Docker is
only a small part of the a much large and much more intrusive design
decision to use containers for upgrading Fuel (and also the design
decision to use a different mechanism based on Puppet for patching
OpenStack). I think we should question high-level design decisions
like these more often, even after they are implemented.

> Also, I'd like to ask everyone to provide
> such information in every bug you report if possible (or if get this info
> later, put comments): in many bug reports it is unclear to understand how
> severe issue is.

I think we should start updating bug description more often, so that
you can find a summary of current state of the bug and of all relevant
information from the description, without having to scroll through
dozens of comments. We should also use paste.openstack.org more
heavily and avoid pasting more than 1-2 lines of logs into bug
description and comments, also to make it easier to find important
bits in bugs history.