Meta-package naming for Xenial LTS backports

Wed Aug 10 15:54:26 UTC 2016

Hi Guys,

Are we expecting to make all "edge" kernels available via MAAS, or should
MAAS just ignore the these for the time being ?

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/attachments/20160810/365d016e/attachment.html>