[MidoNet] Upgrade protobufs 2.6

Galo Navarro galo at midokura.com
Fri Nov 7 14:53:28 UTC 2014


Hi Jaume,

As JorJu says, I think you can remove silent mode. @Devs: this means
now 3 jenkins votes are required now to merge.

I think for gate purposes having icehouse is good enough probably. But
we should run all versions in nighty jobs against master.

Do these work with packages, or compile midonet source?

Also, I think we should configure gates for the midostack, plugin, and
python client projects ASAP. Not sure what's the best suite to run for
these, but basically it should verify that we don't break integration.
(e.g., I should not be able to merge a review in midonet, pyc, plugin,
or midostack, if this my patch fails to run with the upstream version
of the rest of the components).

Thanks!
/g

On 7 November 2014 14:51, Jaume Devesa <jaume at midokura.com> wrote:
> Hello Galo,
>
> yesterday I opened this gate:
> http://jenkins-dev.tyo.midokura.net/view/neutron-gates/job/gate-midonet-WITH-neutron-icehouse/
>
> It builds midonet patches against neutron stable/icehouse (I understand that
> this is the most stable one). It is mostly green now, but it is still in
> silent mode. It does not give feedback in gerrit. Can I uncheck the silent
> mode? How it does synchronize with the rest of the gates without a Zuul
> system?
>
> BTW: we have two more gates for midonet patches, one that builds with
> stable/juno and another one that builds current openstack master.
>
> Regards,
>
> On 7 November 2014 14:13, Galo Navarro <galo at midokura.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Pino, Joe kindly fixed this just shortly after the problem was
>> detected, so we should be safe now.
>>
>> IMO we do need to tackle the CI gap asap though. We do need a gate job
>> that prevents any changes that break midonet/master and
>> midostack/master. If this is not getting there soon, then we should
>> pin midostack dep on midonet to a known stable revision.
>>
>> @Jorju do you know what's the status of this?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> /g
>>
>>
>> On 7 November 2014 14:04, Giuseppe (Pino) de Candia
>> <gdecandia at midokura.com> wrote:
>> > Galo,
>> >
>> > I agree. Will you take ownership of these changes/fixes?
>> >
>> > The important point is to not leave the quick start in a broken state.
>> >
>> > -Pino
>> >
>> > On Nov 6, 2014 9:37 AM, "Galo Navarro" <galo at midokura.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I was actually just writing that we should just *not* use the tip of
>> >> the dev branch for the quickstart instructions because, by nature,
>> >> it's going to be breakage prone and this is the last thing we want for
>> >> the quickstart experience.
>> >>
>> >> I'd:
>> >>
>> >> - Update the quickstart instructions to pull midostack from a version
>> >> of midonet that we know works with midostack, not just whatever the
>> >> tip is. And then explain how can brave souls pull development branch
>> >> tip, should they want to.
>> >> - Coordinate with midostack maintainers to update the script. Ubuntu
>> >> 14 doesn't have protobufs 2.6, so the script needs to do the same
>> >> steps I described above.
>> >>
>> >> /g
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 6 November 2014 09:28, Giuseppe (Pino) de Candia
>> >> <gdecandia at midokura.com> wrote:
>> >> > In that case the mailing list announcement shouldn't be the only
>> >> > place
>> >> > where
>> >> > this information is provided.
>> >> >
>> >> > I've added midonet@ but we should also update the quick start guide
>> >> > OR
>> >> > find
>> >> > a way to bring the dependency in automatically. Can it be hosted in
>> >> > artifactory?
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > Pino
>> >> >
>> >> > On Nov 6, 2014 9:22 AM, "Galo Navarro" <galo at midokura.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's likely. Anyone who compiles source (or has a system that does
>> >> >> it)
>> >> >> should consider the notice above and update accordingly.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> /g
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 6 November 2014 09:04, Giuseppe (Pino) de Candia
>> >> >> <gdecandia at midokura.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > Will this break midostack?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On Nov 5, 2014 6:51 PM, "Antonio Sagliocco" <antonio at midokura.com>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> + possibly an:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> $ ldconfig
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> at the end of the installation if protoc complains about linking
>> >> >> >> problems.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Cheers,
>> >> >> >> -- as
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Galo Navarro <galo at midokura.com>
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Hello devs,
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> We've just merged a new commit into master that requires
>> >> >> >>> protobufs
>> >> >> >>> 2.6
>> >> >> >>> so you'll need to upgrade to be able to compile.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Go here: https://github.com/google/protobuf/releases
>> >> >> >>> Download the 2.6.1 tar
>> >> >> >>> Uncompress
>> >> >> >>> ./configure
>> >> >> >>> make
>> >> >> >>> sudo make install
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> protoc --version should display now the updated version, and the
>> >> >> >>> build
>> >> >> >>> should work fine.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Any questions, let me know.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> /g
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> Jaume Devesa
> Software Engineer at Midokura
>
>


More information about the MidoNet mailing list