On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Dugger, Donald D <donald.d.dug...@intel.com > wrote:
> OK, it looks like the concensus is that we don't try and keep the gantt > tree in sync with nova instead we: > > 1) Get the current gantt tree to pass unit tests > 2) Get gantt to pass integration tests (e.g. get it working as the nova > scheduler) > 3) Modify devstack to optionally use gantt > 4) Freeze scheduler changes to nova as we: > This should be covered the the standard feature freeze for Icehouse > a) Extract all the changes that were needed to get gantt working > b) Recreate the gantt tree from the current nova tree > c) Apply all the patches from step 4.a > 5) Unfreeze scheduler work but now all work is targeted exclusively to > the gantt tree > LGTM, although once we have a working gantt for Icehouse I think we should have another round of discussion about deprecating nova-scheduler in favor of gantt. On I high level that is something I think we all support, but the devil is in the details. > > Note that the current gantt tree has already changed the `nova' directory > to `gantt' but there are more details for steps 1 and 2 that would be good > to explicitly list. > > -- > Don Dugger > "Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale > Ph: 303/443-3786 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Russell Bryant [mailto:rbry...@redhat.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:42 AM > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [gantt] Sync up patches > > On 01/16/2014 11:18 AM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote: > > > > On Jan 16, 2014, at 6:46 AM, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com > > <mailto:joe.gord...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Dugger, Donald D > >> <donald.d.dug...@intel.com <mailto:donald.d.dug...@intel.com>> > >> wrote: > >> > >> My thought was to try and get some parallel effort going, do the > >> resync as a continuing task as suffer a little ongoing pain versus a > >> large amount of pain at the end. Given that the steps for a resync > >> are the same no matter when we do it waiting until the end is > >> acceptable.____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> From a `just do it' perspective I think we're in violent agreement on > >> the top level tasks, as long as your step 3, integration testing, is > >> the same as what I've been calling working functionality, e.g. have > >> the nova scheduler use the gantt source tree.____ > >> > >> __ __ > >> > >> PS: How I resync. What I've done is create a list with md5sums of > >> all the files in nova that we've duplicated in gantt. I then update > >> a nova git tree and compare the current md5sums for those files with > >> my list. I use format-patch to get the patches from the nova tree > >> and grep for any patch that applies to a gantt file. I then use `git > >> am' to apply those patches to the gantt tree, modifying any of the > >> patches that are needed. > >> > >> > >> So this sync won't work once we start the nova/gantt rename, so we > >> need a better approach. > >> > >> Syncing the gantt tree with nova sounds like a daunting task. > >> Perhaps it would be easier if we use the current gantt tree as a test > >> to see what is involved in getting gantt working, and then redo the > >> fork after the icehouse feature freeze with the aim of getting the > >> gantt tree working by the start of juno, so we can have the freeze > >> nova-scheduler discussion. Syncing nova and gantt during feature > >> freeze should be significantly easier then doing it now. > > > > > > I would personally just vote for the nuclear approach of freezing nova > > scheduler and doing work in gantt. If close to icehouse 3 we see that > > gantt is not going to be ready in time we can selectively backport > > stuff to nova-scheduler and push gantt to juno. > > That sounds OK to me, but I would really just like to see gantt running > before we freeze nova-scheduler. > > Joe's idea might work for this too, which would be something like: > > 1) Go through the exercise of making the current thing running using the > current repo (without keeping it in sync). This includes devstack > integration. > > 2) Once we see it working and are ready for the nuclear freeze and switch, > re-generate the repo from nova master and apply everything needed to make > it work. > > -- > Russell Bryant > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
