In order to move to rails 4, I'm opening a feature branch on my fork of the
foreman project. you can find it at https://github.com/unorthodoxgeek/foreman/tree/rails4
If you're working on a rails 4 task, please open a PR to my feature branch,
instead of to the develop branch on the main fork, do this only if your
change is relevant to rails 4 only and is going to break the rails 3.2
branch (i.e. if you're just adding some gem which works on both, or
changing a deprecated method to something which works on both, merge it to
develop)
I'll be rebasing that feature branch with develop daily.
Would it help if I set up a Jenkins job to monitor that branch so you
have a rough idea of the build status?
If you have a TODO list somewhere, that'd be really interesting to see.
Maybe keep it in redmine tickets, in the git tree, or on the wiki?
(About - Foreman)
The RPM packaging is a concern of mine, which I'll continue with in the
new year. I got back to rebuilding Foreman into its own SCL the other
day (#4841) which will help us rebuild RPMs for ror40 and it seems to be
going OK, the main bulk of the work is updating spec files and
mass-rebuilding.
···
On 16/12/14 09:46, Tom Caspy wrote:
> In order to move to rails 4, I'm opening a feature branch on my fork of
> the foreman project. you can find it
> at https://github.com/unorthodoxgeek/foreman/tree/rails4
> If you're working on a rails 4 task, please open a PR to my feature
> branch, instead of to the develop branch on the main fork, do this only
> if your change is relevant to rails 4 only and is going to break the
> rails 3.2 branch (i.e. if you're just adding some gem which works on
> both, or changing a deprecated method to something which works on both,
> merge it to develop)
>
> I'll be rebasing that feature branch with develop daily.
yeah, sure.
currently the branch's status is "everything's broken", I'm working on
actually getting rails to boot up, then I'll run the tests.
so no rush…
···
On Tuesday, December 16, 2014 11:51:57 AM UTC+2, Dominic Cleal wrote:
>
> On 16/12/14 09:46, Tom Caspy wrote:
> > In order to move to rails 4, I'm opening a feature branch on my fork of
> > the foreman project. you can find it
> > at https://github.com/unorthodoxgeek/foreman/tree/rails4
> > If you're working on a rails 4 task, please open a PR to my feature
> > branch, instead of to the develop branch on the main fork, do this only
> > if your change is relevant to rails 4 only and is going to break the
> > rails 3.2 branch (i.e. if you're just adding some gem which works on
> > both, or changing a deprecated method to something which works on both,
> > merge it to develop)
> >
> > I'll be rebasing that feature branch with develop daily.
>
> Would it help if I set up a Jenkins job to monitor that branch so you
> have a rough idea of the build status?
>
> If you have a TODO list somewhere, that'd be really interesting to see.
> Maybe keep it in redmine tickets, in the git tree, or on the wiki?
> (http://projects.theforeman.org/projects/foreman/wiki/)
>
> The RPM packaging is a concern of mine, which I'll continue with in the
> new year. I got back to rebuilding Foreman into its own SCL the other
> day (#4841) which will help us rebuild RPMs for ror40 and it seems to be
> going OK, the main bulk of the work is updating spec files and
> mass-rebuilding.
>
> --
> Dominic Cleal
> Red Hat Engineering
>
···
On 16/12/14 09:57, Tom Caspy wrote:
> yeah, sure.
> currently the branch's status is "everything's broken", I'm working on
> actually getting rails to boot up, then I'll run the tests.
> so no rush...
Whilst I doubt the Debs will be as bad (no SCL to build) I'll be happy
to run some tests based off your branch once we get a bit closer. Just
remind me
Greg
···
On 16 December 2014 at 09:51, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> The RPM packaging is a concern of mine, which I'll continue with in the
> new year. I got back to rebuilding Foreman into its own SCL the other
> day (#4841) which will help us rebuild RPMs for ror40 and it seems to be
> going OK, the main bulk of the work is updating spec files and
> mass-rebuilding.
I know this in it's early stages, but what is the timeline for this change
and plan for plugins? The upgrade to Rails 4 and the packaging migration to
our own SCL will at a minimum need to be applied to Katello prior to the
changes going into develop of Foreman. Further, since Katello by default
ships and enables the plugins listed here ( https://github.com/Katello/katello-installer/blob/master/config/answers.katello-installer.yaml#L29-L32)
they would also need to be upgraded in order for Katello as a whole not to
be broken by this change.
Eric
···
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 5:25 AM, Greg Sutcliffe wrote:
>
> On 16 December 2014 at 09:51, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> > The RPM packaging is a concern of mine, which I'll continue with in the
> > new year. I got back to rebuilding Foreman into its own SCL the other
> > day (#4841) which will help us rebuild RPMs for ror40 and it seems to be
> > going OK, the main bulk of the work is updating spec files and
> > mass-rebuilding.
>
> Whilst I doubt the Debs will be as bad (no SCL to build) I'll be happy
> to run some tests based off your branch once we get a bit closer. Just
> remind me :)
>
> Greg
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "foreman-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
I expect most actively maintained plugins will get updated in short
order as core Foreman developers work on them too. I'm sure PRs and
other assistance will be appreciated by maintainers, and we can get most
in order before a release.
I may remove plugins that are known to be incompatible from the repos
during package rebuilds, but will probably see nearer the time. (This
already happens today when they're abandoned.)
···
On 16/12/14 12:59, Eric D Helms wrote:
> I know this in it's early stages, but what is the timeline for this
> change and plan for plugins? The upgrade to Rails 4 and the packaging
> migration to our own SCL will at a minimum need to be applied to Katello
> prior to the changes going into develop of Foreman. Further, since
> Katello by default ships and enables the plugins listed here
> (https://github.com/Katello/katello-installer/blob/master/config/answers.katello-installer.yaml#L29-L32)
> they would also need to be upgraded in order for Katello as a whole not
> to be broken by this change.
Is there a targeted release for the Rails 4 update?
···
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Dominic Cleal wrote:
>
> On 16/12/14 12:59, Eric D Helms wrote:
> > I know this in it's early stages, but what is the timeline for this
> > change and plan for plugins? The upgrade to Rails 4 and the packaging
> > migration to our own SCL will at a minimum need to be applied to Katello
> > prior to the changes going into develop of Foreman. Further, since
> > Katello by default ships and enables the plugins listed here
> > (
> https://github.com/Katello/katello-installer/blob/master/config/answers.katello-installer.yaml#L29-L32
> )
> > they would also need to be upgraded in order for Katello as a whole not
> > to be broken by this change.
>
> I expect most actively maintained plugins will get updated in short
> order as core Foreman developers work on them too. I'm sure PRs and
> other assistance will be appreciated by maintainers, and we can get most
> in order before a release.
>
> I may remove plugins that are known to be incompatible from the repos
> during package rebuilds, but will probably see nearer the time. (This
> already happens today when they're abandoned.)
>
> --
> Dominic Cleal
> Red Hat Engineering
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "foreman-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
Also, is the plan to use the ror40 SCL to maintain EL6 and EL7 support?
···
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Eric D Helms wrote:
>
> Is there a targeted release for the Rails 4 update?
>
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Dominic Cleal > wrote:
>>
>> On 16/12/14 12:59, Eric D Helms wrote:
>> > I know this in it's early stages, but what is the timeline for this
>> > change and plan for plugins? The upgrade to Rails 4 and the packaging
>> > migration to our own SCL will at a minimum need to be applied to Katello
>> > prior to the changes going into develop of Foreman. Further, since
>> > Katello by default ships and enables the plugins listed here
>> > (
>> https://github.com/Katello/katello-installer/blob/master/config/answers.katello-installer.yaml#L29-L32
>> )
>> > they would also need to be upgraded in order for Katello as a whole not
>> > to be broken by this change.
>>
>> I expect most actively maintained plugins will get updated in short
>> order as core Foreman developers work on them too. I'm sure PRs and
>> other assistance will be appreciated by maintainers, and we can get most
>> in order before a release.
>>
>> I may remove plugins that are known to be incompatible from the repos
>> during package rebuilds, but will probably see nearer the time. (This
>> already happens today when they're abandoned.)
>>
>> --
>> Dominic Cleal
>> Red Hat Engineering
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "foreman-dev" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "foreman-dev" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to foreman-dev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
I think it's a bit early to judge this at the moment, but I'd bet on 1.9
rather than 1.8. Once Tom's fleshed out the branch a bit, worked out
what blockers exist and we can judge the stability, we can judge when
it's a good time to merge.
···
On 16/12/14 16:07, Eric D Helms wrote:
> Is there a targeted release for the Rails 4 update?
···
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 08:13:29AM +0000, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> On 16/12/14 16:17, Jason Montleon wrote:
> > Also, is the plan to use the ror40 SCL to maintain EL6 and EL7 support?
>
> Yes.
>
–
Stephen Benjamin
Red Hat GmbH | http://de.redhat.com/ | Sitz: Grasbrunn
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht München, HRB 153243
Geschäftsführer: Charles Cachera, Michael Cunningham,
Michael O’Neill, Charles Peters
We'd probably move from F19 to F20, which ships Rails 4.0 (SCLs are
loosely based on Fedora). I've been watching the progress of SCLs and
the playground stuff in Fedora, I hope we can move to it in the future.
···
On 17/12/14 12:50, Stephen Benjamin wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 08:13:29AM +0000, Dominic Cleal wrote:
>> On 16/12/14 16:17, Jason Montleon wrote:
>>> Also, is the plan to use the ror40 SCL to maintain EL6 and EL7 support?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>
> Has Fedora been discussed? Looks like ror40 is not quite there for F21,
> but it's maybe coming?
>
> https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/rhscl/ror40-fedora/
