jclouds-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ignasi Barrera <n...@apache.org>
Subject Re: COMMERCIAL:jclouds 1.9.1 and provider promotion
Date Mon, 15 Jun 2015 20:23:38 GMT
+1 to release 1.9.1 asap.

WDYT about releasing it next week? Let's give this week to finish
stuff and code reviews and release it next week?

Regarding the DigitalOcean v2, I'm pretty sure it will be ready by
then, *but* including it in 1.9.1 would be tricky, as it depends on
the OAuth API, which is in jclouds-labs-google (it has been promoted
only to master to avoid a groupId change). We can either make that api
depend on the jclouds-labs-google repo or just merge it to master (but
this way, starting on November, the jclouds 1.9.x series wouldn't have
any DigitalOcean provider, which is losing a provider we currently
have un a bugfix release). Personally, I'd say we could merge it to
1.9.1 depending on OAuth in jclouds-labs-google (it is only a matter
of repos, as the groupId of the OAuth api does not have anything
related to GCE). Thoughts?



On 15 June 2015 at 20:53, Andrew Gaul <gaul@apache.org> wrote:
> I also agree that we should push for 1.9.1 instead of delaying.  1.9.x
> has several new features: promoting the openstack-swift based Rackspace
> CloudFiles providers, portable copy blob, and portable access control.
> We can follow up with a 1.9.2 later this summer and 2.0 in the early
> fall.  I support promoting all the providers mentioned and agree that
> master and a major version seems appropriate for this.
>
> The blobstore multipart fixes are actually an entirely new approach to
> implementing MPU (JCLOUDS-894).  As a side effect it adds support for
> openstack-swift MPU but changes a bunch of other things as well.  We
> have not yet ported all providers to the new approach (missing GCS and
> Glacier) and I am still gaining confidence in the implementation so I
> would prefer not to backport it yet.
>
> I want to call out some major blobstore issues which will not likely
> make 1.9.1:
>
> AWS-S3 V4 signature support
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-480
>
> GCS uploads with InputStream payloads are not working
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-912
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 02:43:19PM +0000, Zack Shoylev wrote:
>> We should try to release 1.9.1 asap.
>> As for content, it should also include the autovalue updates and some of the blobstore
multipart fixes (do we need to discuss the MPU more?).
>>
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Ignasi Barrera <nacx@apache.org>
>> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2015 5:34 AM
>> To: dev@jclouds.apache.org
>> Subject: COMMERCIAL:jclouds 1.9.1 and provider promotion
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> It's been a while since our last release and I'd like to start
>> planning jclouds 1.9.1. Many bugfixes have been introduced and there
>> are several providers that have been improved a lot, including GCE,
>> DigitalOcean, Azure and ProfitBricks.
>>
>> Before talking about dates, I'd like to share the important topics
>> (IMO) that should be finished for 1.9.1:
>>
>> * Merge the ProfitBrixks ComputeService integration [1].
>> * Complete the Azure Compute refactor [2, 3]. There is an ongoing
>> effort to improve how virtual machines are created but it is moving
>> slowly. @andreaturli, @ilrtosso, once the PRs are up to date, would
>> you be able to help reviewing them?
>> * Merge the DigitalOcean v2 provider [4, 5]. There is still no PR, for
>> it but the provider is ready to go.
>>
>>
>> Considering that we are in time to finish this, we'll be in a good
>> position to promote the following providers (only in master, for
>> 2.0.0), as they'll have been out there for a while with the live tests
>> passing:
>>
>> * GCE. I plan to promote it this week.
>> * Azure. It's been out since 1.9.0 and will remain in labs after the
>> compute service refactoring. Should be ready to be promoted for 2.0.0.
>> * Profitbricks. Same thing. @devcsrj is doing a fantastic job keeping
>> it up to date and having it working for in 1.9.1 with all live tests
>> passing gives us and our users enough time to test and get used to it.
>> I see no reason to keep it in labs.
>> * DigitalOcean v2. Same thing. The v1 API has been stable for ages but
>> will be shutdown on November 2015. We shouldn't promote it but promote
>> the v2 for 2.0.0. It's also stable and the interface hasn't changed.
>> The internals are different (different api calls) but the behavior,
>> the results, are the same, so users using the ComputeService shouldn't
>> experience any change.
>>
>>
>>
>> Please, feel free to give your feedback, add what you would want to
>> see in 1.9.1. Your opinions are very welcome!
>>
>>
>> Ignasi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/145
>> [2] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/175
>> [3] https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds-labs/pull/157
>> [4] https://github.com/ccustine/jclouds-labs/tree/features/digitalocean2final
>> [5] https://github.com/nacx/jclouds-labs/tree/do-pagination
>
> --
> Andrew Gaul
> http://gaul.org/

Mime
View raw message