[ceph-users] ceph-disk is now deprecated

Alfredo Deza adeza at redhat.com
Tue Nov 28 04:52:17 PST 2017


On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Joao Eduardo Luis <joao at suse.de> wrote:
> On 11/28/2017 11:54 AM, Alfredo Deza wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Wido den Hollander <wido at 42on.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Op 27 november 2017 om 14:36 schreef Alfredo Deza <adeza at redhat.com>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> For the upcoming Luminous release (12.2.2), ceph-disk will be
>>>> officially in 'deprecated' mode (bug fixes only). A large banner with
>>>> deprecation information has been added, which will try to raise
>>>> awareness.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As much as I like ceph-volume and the work being done, is it really a
>>> good idea to use a minor release to deprecate a tool?
>>>
>>> Can't we just introduce ceph-volume and deprecate ceph-disk at the
>>> release of M? Because when you upgrade to 12.2.2 suddenly existing
>>> integrations will have deprecation warnings being thrown at them while they
>>> haven't upgraded to a new major version.
>>
>>
>> ceph-volume has been present since the very first release of Luminous,
>> the deprecation warning in ceph-disk is the only "new" thing
>> introduced for 12.2.2.
>
>
> I think Wido's question still stands: why can't ceph-disk be deprecated
> solely in M, and removed by N?

Like I mentioned, I don't think this is set in stone (yet), but it was
the idea from the beginning (See Oct 9th thread "killing ceph-disk"),
and I don't think it would
be terribly bad to keep ceph-disk in Mimic, but fully frozen, with no
updates or bug fixes. And full removal in N

The deprecation warnings need to stay for Luminous though.

>
> I get that it probably seems nuts to support ceph-disk and ceph-volume; and
> by deprecating and removing in (less than) a full release cycle will force
> people to actually move from one to the other. But we're also doing it when
> roughly 4 months away from Mimic being frozen.
>
> This is the sort of last minute overall, core, changes that are not expected
> from a project that should be as mature as Ceph. This is not some internal
> feature that users won't notice - we're effectively changing the way users
> deploy and orchestrate their clusters.
>
>
>   -Joao


More information about the ceph-users mailing list