[gluster-packaging] Release 4.0: Making it happen! (GlusterD2)

Kaushal M kshlmster at gmail.com
Thu Jan 11 07:04:45 UTC 2018

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 1:56 AM, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY <kkeithle at redhat.com> wrote:
> comments inline
> On 01/10/2018 02:08 PM, Shyam Ranganathan wrote:
> Hi, (GD2 team, packaging team, please read)
> Here are some things we need to settle so that we can ship/release GD2
> along with Gluster 4.0 release (considering this is a separate
> repository as of now).
> 1) Generating release package (read as RPM for now) to go with Gluster
> 4.0 release
> Proposal:
>   - GD2 makes github releases, as in [1]
>   - GD2 Releases (tagging etc.) are made in tandem to Gluster releases
>     - So, when an beta1/RC0 is tagged for gluster release, this will
> receive a coordinated release (if required) from the GD2 team
>     - GD2 team will receive *at-least* a 24h notice on a tentative
> Gluster tagging date/time, to aid the GD2 team to prepare the required
> release tarball in github
> This is a no-op. In github creating a tag or a release automatically creates
> the tar source file.

While true, this tarball isn't enough. The GD2 build scripts lookup
versioning from git tags or from a VERSION file (same as glusterfs).
Both of these are not present in the tarball github generates.
The GD2 release script generates tarballs that have everything
required to build a properly versioned GD2.

>   - Post a gluster tag being created, and the subsequent release job is
> run for gluster 4.0, the packaging team will be notified about which GD2
> tag to pick up for packaging, with this gluster release
>     - IOW, a response to the Jenkins generated packaging job, with the
> GD2 version/tag/release to pick up
>   - GD2 will be packaged as a sub-package of the glusterfs package, and
> hence will have appropriate changes to the glusterfs spec file (or other
> variants of packaging as needed), to generate one more package (RPM) to
> post in the respective download location
>   - The GD2 sub-package version would be the same as the release version
> that GD2 makes (it will not be the gluster package version, at least for
> now)
> IMO it's clearer if the -glusterd2 sub-package has the same version as the
> rest of the glusterfs-* packages.

+1. We will follow glusterfs versioning not just for the packages, but
for the source itself.

> The -glusterd2 sub-package's Summary and/or its %description can be used to
> identify the version of GD2.
> Emphasis on IMO. It is possible for the -glusterd sub-package to have a
> version that's different than the parent package(s).
>   - For now, none of the gluster RPMs would be dependent on the GD2 RPM
> in the downloads, so any user wanting to use GD2 would have to install
> the package specifically and then proceed as needed
>   - (thought/concern) Jenkins smoke job (or other jobs) that builds RPMs
> will not build GD2 (as the source is not available) and will continue as
> is (which means there is enough spec file magic here that we can specify
> during release packaging to additionally build GD2)
> 2) Generate a quick start or user guide, to aid using GD2 with 4.0
> @Kaushal if this is generated earlier (say with beta builds of 4.0
> itself) we could get help from the community to test drive the same and
> provide feedback to improve the guide for users by the release (as
> discussed in the maintainers meeting)
> One thing not covered above is what happens when GD2 fixes a high priority
> bug between releases of glusterfs.
> Once option is we wait until the next release of glusterfs to include the
> update to GD2.
> Or we can respin (rerelease) the glusterfs packages with the updated GD2.
> I.e. glusterfs-4.0.0-1 (containing GD2-1.0.0) -> glusterfs-4.0.0-2
> (containing GD2-1.0.1).
> Or we can decide not to make a hard rule and do whatever makes the most
> sense at the time. If the fix is urgent, we respin. If the fix is not urgent
> it waits for the next Gluster release. (From my perspective though I'd
> rather not do respins, I've already got plenty of work doing the regular
> releases.)
> The alternative to all of the above is to package GD2 in its own package.
> This entails opening a New Package Request and going through the packaging
> reviews. All in all it's a lot of work. If GD2 source is eventually going to
> be moved into the main glusterfs source though this probably doesn't make
> sense.
> --
> Kaleb
> _______________________________________________
> packaging mailing list
> packaging at gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging

More information about the packaging mailing list