Polling for opinions on removing vm-builder, sandbox-upgrader and auto-upgrade-tester

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Polling for opinions on removing vm-builder, sandbox-upgrader and auto-upgrade-tester

Christian Ehrhardt
Hi,
due to a few recent bugs in ubuntu-vm-builder I got reminded that whenever vmbuilder comes up, people feel bad and have to excuse a lot as it is essentially un-maintained.
All use-cases people seemed to care about are replaced by uvtool [1] which is far more widely used.

I happened to realize that it was already tried to be removed for the same reasons [2] in late 2013.
It was un-maintained then and hasn't changed.

There was a short flicker of an upstream community [3], but not enough to consider it maintained at the moment. If this really comes to life we can add it in later releases.

The reasons preventing the removal last time were reverse dependencies from "sandbox-upgrader" and "auto-upgrade-tester".
These are Ubuntu only as well and have no reverse dependencies on their own.
Furthermore it seems their former (assumed) users are no more utilizing them [4]

Therefore this is a final poll for objections, before pushing harder on the removal of the whole set of:
- vmbuilder
- sandbox-upgrader
- auto-upgrade-tester

[4]: https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2017/07/13/%23ubuntu-devel.html#t20:43

P.S. this is not just looking for an easy reply-to-all:"yes please keep it". As Serge phrased it so well 3 years ago the alternative is "someone who has the time and technical ability to maintain the package (in past and current releases)"

--
Christian Ehrhardt
Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Polling for opinions on removing vm-builder, sandbox-upgrader and auto-upgrade-tester

Christian Ehrhardt
On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:52 AM, Christian Ehrhardt <[hidden email]> wrote:

Therefore this is a final poll for objections, before pushing harder on the removal of the whole set of:
- vmbuilder
- sandbox-upgrader
- auto-upgrade-tester


On this thread there were no reports on any active users of the tools so far. Still looking for any feedback on that part - also a nack to confirm no more (or never) using it will help the decision.


In  addition it turns out that due to issues in vm-builder a removal was considered in zesty as well [1]

Yet OTOH there was some feedback on a number of forks.
- by Vacheslav Anzhiganov [2] [3] [4]
- and Chris Puttick [5] [6]

I appreciate that you two picked up the work on that, you might even combine your efforts.
The latter seems slightly more active looking at the changes.
Also Serge offered to help SRUing fixes if someone else ensures that the latest upstream works, thanks Serge!
But since we need to make a decision I wanted to ask you two directly, if you are willing to continue to maintain it as "the upstream" of the project, handle bug reports and so on.
- If you do so it would be great if you could pass through [7]  and try to address some of them, coordinate with Serge and me to upload a new one to Artful after this and we can consider SRUs from there
- If not - fine as well - we will remove it from the archive and it can continue to live outside of the archive (you could consider [8] as packaging alternative if you'd prefer a more direct way to deliver your code).




--
Christian Ehrhardt
Software Engineer, Ubuntu Server
Canonical Ltd

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Polling for opinions on removing vm-builder, sandbox-upgrader and auto-upgrade-tester

Christian Ehrhardt
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Chris Puttick <[hidden email]> wrote:
[...] 
So if you want to define us as "upstream" we'd be proud to be making a
contribution (but in the end we're just scratching our collective itch
and have found nothing that does it better in the context we work in
(small-medium size deployments on multiple sites)).

If it solves things for you it might be a solution for more people.
We might remove the unused dependent test packages thou depending how the feedback looks like.
 
We'll review the open bugs on Launchpad and any we are up to
addressing, as sys admins rather than devs ;) , we'll open an issue
report on our fork (and report back to Launchpad once fixed?). Sound
like a way forward?

Sounds great - lets give you a bit of time, lets say 3.5 weeks and sync again on 14th of August.
That hopefully "enough" time for you to go over the issues and get an idea if/how they could be solved.
Also it is still before feature freeze to upload a hopefully much better version there.

If you need assistance on the Launchpad bug processing let me (and probably Serge) know.
Likely initially it is all about commenting on the bugs that you pick (or reject) and linking the github issues that you open.

--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Loading...