[Deepsea-users] Official DeepSea package repositories
tserong at suse.com
Tue Jul 4 20:38:47 MDT 2017
On 07/04/2017 11:36 PM, Lenz Grimmer wrote:
> I'm currently working on updating the upstream openATTIC 3.x
> installation documentation to reflect the requirements of having a Ceph
> cluster that has been deployed using DeepSea.
> Which is the official/up to date package repository on OBS that users of
> the upstream packages should be using for installation?
> A search for "DeepSea" on OBS yields the following likely candidates:
> The package in Eric's "swiftgist" home project (which used to be the
> default location) is at version 0.7.13, while the one in the
> ceph:luminous project is currently at 0.7.15, but it also contains a
> 0.7.11 tarball, but that one does not seem to be used by the RPM spec file.
That tarball just needs deleting.
> The one in filesystems:ceph/deepsea is at version 0.7.11, too.
> I assume that for openATTIC 3.x and Ceph Luminous, the package in
> filesystems:ceph:luminous/deepsea is the correct one to use, correct?
Short version: yes.
Long version: Right now, filesystems:ceph:luminous/deepsea is a link to
filesystems:ceph/deepsea. Both should thus be the latest and greatest,
which means really filesystems:ceph:luminous/deepsea needs to be
submitted to filesystems:ceph/deepsea to make that true.
In future, we may end up with something like the following:
- filesystems:ceph:jewel/deepsea (for deepsea version 0.6.x)
- filesystems:ceph:luminous/deepsea (for deepsea version 0.7.x)
- filesystems:ceph:m[whatever]/deepsea (etc.)
...with the latest version always being a link to
filesystems:ceph/deepsea. This makes sense if we're maintaining
multiple codestreams of deepsea. If it turns out that we don't actually
need to do that, and can just maintain a single codestream, we can drop
the structure and only use filesystems:ceph/deepsea.
Senior Clustering Engineer
tserong at suse.com
More information about the Deepsea-users