Meta-package naming for Xenial LTS backports

[Brad Figg]

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:54:26AM -0400, Andres Rodriguez wrote:
> Hi Guys,
> 
> Are we expecting to make all "edge" kernels available via MAAS, or should
> MAAS just ignore the these for the time being ?
> 

My $.02 ..

The usage scenario I am thinking of is with a cloud customer that uses JuJu
& MaaS for their deployments. They have a "development" cloud separate from
their "production" cloud. They are running the rolling hwe kernel in
production and want to start testing the next hwe kernel before they get it
automatically. I think they need to be able to install that via JuJu & MaaS
on their development cloud.

Brad

> Thanks!
> 
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Tim Gardner <tim.gardner at canonical.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > On 08/10/2016 09:40 AM, Brad Figg wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 08:37:34AM -0700, Brad Figg wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 12:44:32PM -0700, Leann Ogasawara wrote:
> > >>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Leann Ogasawara <
> > >>> leann.ogasawara at canonical.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Tim Gardner <
> > tim.gardner at canonical.com>
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> On 07/29/2016 10:37 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 08:40:46AM -0700, Tim Gardner wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On 07/27/2016 08:04 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> We have been discussing some naming for new meta-packages to
> > allow for
> > >>>>>>>> automatic rolling upgrades between Hardware Enablement (HWE)
> > kernels
> > >>>>>>>> within the LTS series.  This thread aims to firm those up.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Currently we have meta-packages of the following forms:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>     linux{,-image,-headers,-signed,-tools}-<flavour>[-<variant>]
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> The flavour then represents the primary use case for the kernel
> > (for
> > >>>>>>>> example generic and lowlatency) and the optional variant
> > currently is
> > >>>>>>>> used to identify the HWE kernels (lts-<series>).  For example:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>     linux-image-generic-lts-xenial
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> The desire is to offer a rolling HWE kernel, this means a kernel
> > >>>>> variant
> > >>>>>>>> which is updated automatically to the latest available HWE kernel
> > >>>>> within
> > >>>>>>>> the LTS.  We would expect that to update to the next HWE kernel at
> > >>>>> each
> > >>>>>>>> point release.  We wish to offer this in two forms, rolling until
> > we
> > >>>>>>>> reach the next LTS release and continuing to roll after an
> > upgrade.
> > >>>>>>>> Finally we wish to be able to offer early accesss to these
> > updates as
> > >>>>>>>> soon as they are available for testing purposes.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> We are proposing the following variants:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>     -hwe-16.04
> > >>>>>>>>     -hwe-rolling
> > >>>>>>>>     -hwe-16.04-early
> > >>>>>>>>     -hwe-rolling-early
> > >>
> > >> Personally, I don't like "early". I prefer "preview".
> > >
> > > Maybe "edge" as that's used by snappy and juju stores. I also like
> > > the sound of "rolling-edge".
> > >
> > >>
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> So for example:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>     linux-generic-hwe-16.04
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> /me puts up some substantial scaffolding round his bikeshed.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> -apw
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> I think the first 2 are fine. What is your intended use for
> > "-early" ?
> > >>>>>>> I'm reluctant to endorse something like "-early" if it isn't a
> > release
> > >>>>>>> requirement. Otherwise it'll get forgotten and grow stale.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The intent of -early is it updated on the same cadance as the main
> > ones,
> > >>>>>> but it switches from lts-Y to lts-Z on first availability rather
> > than
> > >>>>>> waiting for the point release.  So they are the same much of the
> > time,
> > >>>>>> then when a new lts-Z is available that one will switch to it, we
> > >>>>>> stablise it, and then the non -early one moves over to join it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> -apw
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> In the interest of bike shedding, perhaps "-dev" would be more
> > >>>>> descriptive.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I like "-preview", anyone else want to pick a color?
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Introducing some additional questions I've received from the MAAS team:
> > >>>
> > >>> Q: With those kernel names I assume the Debian package names will be
> > >>> linux-hwe-16.04 and linux-hwe-rolling, correct?
> > >>> A: I think we would also encode the <flavor> in there, eg.
> > >>> linux-hwe-16.04-generic or linux-hwe-rolling-lowlatency.
> > >>>
> > >>> Tim, Andy, Brad, thoughts ^^?
> > >>
> > >> I agree we need <flavour>. I think for the preview it would be:
> > >>   linux-hwe-rolling-preview-<flavour>
> > >>
> > >> We are previewing the next roll not the next flavour.
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Q: I was also wondering what the low latency kernels will be named and
> > >>> whether they will have a rolling and early|dev|preview package as well?
> > >>> A:  If we are providing lowlatency as an HWE kernel (which we are),
> > >>> lowlatency should also be rolling and have a preview package as well.
> > As
> > >>> for the specific naming, lets get consensus on the above.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> Agree.
> > >>
> > >>> Q: Right now we have packages in Xenial using the name
> > >>> linux-image-lowlatency-lts-<release>, I'm guessing that will change to
> > >>> something like linux-lowlatency-16.04.
> > >>> A:  Actually, I assumed we would still deliver the
> > >>> linux-image-<flavor>-lts-<release> as they are today.  The new
> > rolling meta
> > >>> packages would then resolve to these.
> > >>>
> > >>> Tim, Andy, Brad, thoughts here too ^^?
> > >>
> > >> That was my thinking as well.
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Q: Also do you have any idea of a time frame when the meta packages
> > for all
> > >>> of this will be released?
> > >>> A: We've not selected a specific deadline to deliver these new meta
> > >>> packages.  I'd estimate end of Sept at the latest.  Is there an earlier
> > >>> date that you were hoping for?
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>> Leann
> > >>
> > >>> --
> >
> > Yeah, what Brad said.
> >
> > --
> > Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Andres Rodriguez
> Engineering Manager, MAAS
> Canonical USA, Inc.

-- 
Brad Figg brad.figg at canonical.com http://www.canonical.com