On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:10 AM Sage Weil
<sage(a)newdream.net> wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jul 2019, Kaleb Keithley wrote:
If Octopus is really an LTS release like all the others, and you want
bleeding edge users to test/use it and give early feedback, then Fedora
is
probably one of the better places to get that
feedback.
I think the first release worth testing outside of the dev community is
the release candidate. I don't like the idea of having any distro carry
an untested dev checkpoint or else someone will lose data... even the rc
should be tested cautiously and, since it is only relevant for a week or
two, I'm not sure that distros can play much of a role there?
To be clear, when I talk about packaging a new version Ceph, it starts out
by _only_ going into Fedora Rawhide. It would be extremely foolish, IMO,
for anyone to run Rawhide for anything that's mission critical.
Sometimes it takes a long time to work through build and packaging issues.
The switch to gcc-8 and gcc-9 are good illustrations of the kinds of issues
that we, as packagers, run into. Those kinds of things are why I — at least
— like to get as early a start as I can. Even short-lived release
candidates are useful stepping stones to the eventual GA.
Personally I'd say that any fears anyone has of people losing data by using
an early dev checkpoint of Ceph on Rawhide are probably a teeny bit
misplaced.
Okay, it sounds like the rc x.1.z releases are a good fit, then. They
should start about ~2 months before the first stable release. I'm not so
sure about the dev checkpoints since they are quite arbitrary. I suspect
less effort would be needed to just do a manual build a few times
partway through the cycle (e.g., now), identify any issues, and open PRs
with build fixes.
sage