[rfc] upgrade pqm chroot to lucid

[vila]

>>>>> John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> writes:

    > On 11/29/2010 8:22 PM, Martin Pool wrote:
    >> I'm going to ask our sysadmins to upgrade bzr's pqm chroot to run
    >> Ubuntu Lucid (from Hardy).  Lucid 10.04 is the most recent
    >> long-term-support release.

So they will probably ask us to upgrade our bzr-landing-dependencies
package.

I've uploaded a lucid version to bzr/proposed and will promote it to the
stable ppa unless someone objects (tomorrow).

    >> 
    >> The immediate motivation for this is so that we can get
    >> python-sphinx running there and checking that the documentation
    >> builds.

So the plan is to upgrade the pqm chroot to lucid first before adding
python-sphinx right ?

    >> 
    >> More generally, if we add new optional dependencies, we may want tests
    >> to run against them in pqm and this will be more easily done on more
    >> recent releases.
    >> 
    >> The main drawback of this is that pqm will no longer run python2.4.
    >> 
    >> There's no single platform where we can test every single python
    >> interpreter and combination of libraries we want to support.

Correct. karmic is the last one where we can have python2.[456].

    >> I think we should run pqm on the platform that's easiest to
    >> maintain, and that's closest to our typical/normal case, and
    >> Lucid is ahead on both counts.  Then we can use Babune to guard
    >> against regressions on less central platforms.

Right. It would be nice to put some effort there so our less central
platforms reach 100% tests passing though, windows and osx are very
close now that we have an upgraded python-testtools, but still.

    >> 
    >> If anyone thinks this is unbearably bad, say so.
    >> 

<snip/>

    > If I read that correctly, RHEL 6 has finally been released as "General
    > Availability". Which means that there is a non-beta RHEL that has better
    > than python2.4, which was the last blocker for *me*.

+1

To the best of my knowledge, here is a rough survey of which python
version is used by which OS (at least which one is used on Babune or to
build the installers, mentioning available 2.x version between parens):

osx 10.5: 2.5 (2.6)

osx 10.6: 2.6
windows:  2.6
freebsd: 2.6
gentoo: 2.6
hardy: 2.5 (2.4)
jaunty: 2.6 (2.5, 2.4 probably but not installed on babune)
karmic: 2.6 (2.5, 2.4)
lucid: 2.6 (2.5)
maverick: 2.6 (2.7 status unclear, I had to uninstall it)
natty: err, no, not under babune yet[1] ;)

    > I'm not sure about the 2.3 series, but I would be perfectly fine if
    > bzr2.4+ was only restricted to python2.5/(2.6?) compatibility, and we
    > stopped worrying about python2.4.

Indeed. I think we should decide on this before starting 2.4 so we can
announce that 2.3 will be the last stable version to support 2.4 (2.5?
2.6 ?!?!).

Given the overview above, and considering 2.3 will be released in
February 2011, I wonder if we can drop 2.5 support (as well as 2.4)
since hardy is becoming the last remaining platform requiring it.

I don't think we can jump to 3.x but that's still something we should
think about.

      Vincent

[1]: I've started tracking it though but given the problems I encounter
(even with testdrive I can only reliably install from the alternate
iso... some days) I can't afford to spend too much time debugging them,
so I'm waiting for things to stabilize a bit more.

--70E0F180C6C.1291113101/axe--