aurora-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Review Request 45212: Remove hard dependency on a specific mesos-version
Date Thu, 24 Mar 2016 04:08:54 GMT


> On March 23, 2016, 2:31 p.m., Stephan Erb wrote:
> > Thinking out loud here, so please comment: 
> > 
> > We could move to a mode where we build against a specific Mesos version, and recommend
that version for deployment, but leave it up to the cluster operator to select and deploy
a compatible Mesos version. 
> > 
> > This would enable the following usecase:
> > 
> > * Aurora 0.12 currently depends on Mesos 0.25
> > * By the given compatability, cluster operators can safely update to Mesos 0.26.
> > * Instead of releasing Aurora with Mesos 0.26 as currently planned, we release a
version build against 0.27. This one will be backwards compatible, and will therefore work
with the deployed Mesos 0.26.
> > * Cluster operators can then safely update to Mesos 0.27 and Mesos 0.28
> > 
> > This should make it easier for us to keep up with the Mesos release train...
> 
> John Sirois wrote:
>     Leaving off the package dependency (which we already do by mistake for the aurora-executor
deb) certainly has a maintenance appeal, since we already need to maintain the install guide
in the aurora repo, which could contain or point to a compatibility matrix we maintain.  If
we do go with no explicit mesos dependency in our binary packages (or a floating one), I think
its important a compatibility matrix be prominent in the install docs since the questions
and install problems will happen.  But if we do maintain a compatibility matrix we could ~just
as easily be adding the compatibility constraints into the package dependencies too and avoiding
a wider swath of bug reports / questions.
>     
>     I've widened the reviewer scope a bit to gather more opions here.  This may need
a dev@ thread.
> 
> Stephan Erb wrote:
>     It's not a real bug for the executor. For the executor we boundle the `mesos.native`
wheel in the pex-file.
> 
> Bill Farner wrote:
>     I'm pro min-version.  Without true semantic versioning in mesos, i'm doubtful we
could be accurate with an upper bound.
> 
> Zameer Manji wrote:
>     I am pro min and max version. I believe the range that John proposes above is the
best way to go. Mesos only guarantees -1/+1 and we should reflect that in the packaging. In
my experience I have been bit by incompatabilities that can exist beyond +1/-1 and they were
very difficult to debug.
>     
>     A more sophisticated cluster operator that knows what they are doing can use the
facilities of rpm/deb to force a version of the package beyond our constraints if neeed.
>     
>     I'm not in favor of a compatability matrix, it seems like it would be a lot of work
to maintain and test out, I suggest just rolling with what the Mesos project recomends until
a better story comes out.

-1 to this patch. I don't see any real benefits here and certainly would not want to _guess_
the compat matrix.


- Maxim


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/45212/#review125027
-----------------------------------------------------------


On March 23, 2016, 2:56 p.m., Pierre Cheynier wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/45212/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 23, 2016, 2:56 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Aurora, Jake Farrell, John Sirois, Stephan Erb, Bill Farner, and Zameer
Manji.
> 
> 
> Repository: aurora-packaging
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> We should consider MESOS_VERSION as the minimal requirement to install
> the current Aurora version instead of enforce a specific Mesos version.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   specs/rpm/aurora.spec 61e7d146108ae7dd5e129d8288a05773c2659d25 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/45212/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Install Aurora through the RPM built with aurora-packaging on a Mesos 0.27
> running install.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Pierre Cheynier
> 
>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message