2:44 p.m.
Greetings.
When ansible 2.0 was released there were some changes in playbook
handling made. For this reason, we created a backwards compatible
package with ansible 1.9 to ease the transition for those that needed
more time to adjust their playbooks.
Late last year it looked like there would be a final release in the 1.9
series addressing some security issues. However, the most recent round
of security issues found in 2.x are difficult to impossible to
backport to 1.9 so there will not be a final 1.9 release.
Since it has now been 1 year since ansible 2.0 was released, and since
ansible 1.9 has known security vulnerabilities, backporting fixes is
impossible, we will be retiring the ansible1.9 package from EPEL.
All ansible 1.9 users are urged to update to 2.x as soon as possible.
kevin
_______________________________________________
epel-announce mailing list -- epel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-announce-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
6:18 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
Greetings.
When ansible 2.0 was released there were some changes in playbook
handling made. For this reason, we created a backwards compatible
package with ansible 1.9 to ease the transition for those that needed
more time to adjust their playbooks.
Late last year it looked like there would be a final release in the 1.9
series addressing some security issues. However, the most recent round
of security issues found in 2.x are difficult to impossible to
backport to 1.9 so there will not be a final 1.9 release.
Since it has now been 1 year since ansible 2.0 was released, and since
ansible 1.9 has known security vulnerabilities, backporting fixes is
impossible, we will be retiring the ansible1.9 package from EPEL.
All ansible 1.9 users are urged to update to 2.x as soon as possible.
Will the mainline 2 package obsolete the old package to ensure it
doesn''t hang around?
5:59 p.m.
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 00:18:09 +0000
Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com>
wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> When ansible 2.0 was released there were some changes in playbook
> handling made. For this reason, we created a backwards compatible
> package with ansible 1.9 to ease the transition for those that
> needed more time to adjust their playbooks.
>
> Late last year it looked like there would be a final release in the
> 1.9 series addressing some security issues. However, the most
> recent round of security issues found in 2.x are difficult to
> impossible to backport to 1.9 so there will not be a final 1.9
> release.
>
> Since it has now been 1 year since ansible 2.0 was released, and
> since ansible 1.9 has known security vulnerabilities, backporting
> fixes is impossible, we will be retiring the ansible1.9 package
> from EPEL.
>
> All ansible 1.9 users are urged to update to 2.x as soon as
> possible.
Will the mainline 2 package obsolete the old package to ensure it
doesn''t hang around?
Well, I am a bit leary of doing that. There may be people using the 1.9
packages that are aware of the security issues and still wish to keep
using it longer for whatever reasons.
kevin
3:20 p.m.
On 13 Jan 2017 11:59 pm, "Kevin Fenzi" <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 00:18:09 +0000
Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com>
wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> When ansible 2.0 was released there were some changes in playbook
> handling made. For this reason, we created a backwards compatible
> package with ansible 1.9 to ease the transition for those that
> needed more time to adjust their playbooks.
>
> Late last year it looked like there would be a final release in the
> 1.9 series addressing some security issues. However, the most
> recent round of security issues found in 2.x are difficult to
> impossible to backport to 1.9 so there will not be a final 1.9
> release.
>
> Since it has now been 1 year since ansible 2.0 was released, and
> since ansible 1.9 has known security vulnerabilities, backporting
> fixes is impossible, we will be retiring the ansible1.9 package
> from EPEL.
>
> All ansible 1.9 users are urged to update to 2.x as soon as
> possible.
Will the mainline 2 package obsolete the old package to ensure it
doesn''t hang around?
Well, I am a bit leary of doing that. There may be people using the 1.9
packages that are aware of the security issues and still wish to keep
using it longer for whatever reasons.
It's been a year already... If they really want to do that they they can
just not install the update or configure their system to exclude ansible.
When you retire it'll vanish from the EPEL mirrors anyway due to the east
we handle that so they'd have to get ansible19 from koji anyway for future
installs, or make an internal repo with it... In which case they'll be
configuring their systems for it.
It's not like they'll get any support for 1.9 in any way from Fedora, EPEL
or upstream after all.
Obsoleting does make a lot of sense to me.
10:55 a.m.
I am -1 to obsoleting from the experience of what happened in the past
with other deployment or configuration management systems do that. It
will break large systems and it will break small systems and it won't
'fix' any systems that anyone will tell you about.
So after an update all anyone will see if they google ansible will be
"Ansible broke my system" just like they did when someone did the same
thing with cfengine, puppet or chef. Yes these sites aren't going to
get any support if they say they are are on ansible 1.9 but they
inevitably feel they got less support when they say "My system got
updated to ansible 2.2 and nothing works..."
For splits like this, I would just push out a final ansible package
which has in its description and a README.EOL "This package is EOL and
no longer supported. It will be removed from the EPEL repositories
around 2017-02-28. Please plan on upgrading your systems to the latest
ansible."
On 14 January 2017 at 16:20, James Hogarth <james.hogarth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 13 Jan 2017 11:59 pm, "Kevin Fenzi" <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017 00:18:09 +0000
Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:44 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
> > Greetings.
> >
> > When ansible 2.0 was released there were some changes in playbook
> > handling made. For this reason, we created a backwards compatible
> > package with ansible 1.9 to ease the transition for those that
> > needed more time to adjust their playbooks.
> >
> > Late last year it looked like there would be a final release in the
> > 1.9 series addressing some security issues. However, the most
> > recent round of security issues found in 2.x are difficult to
> > impossible to backport to 1.9 so there will not be a final 1.9
> > release.
> >
> > Since it has now been 1 year since ansible 2.0 was released, and
> > since ansible 1.9 has known security vulnerabilities, backporting
> > fixes is impossible, we will be retiring the ansible1.9 package
> > from EPEL.
> >
> > All ansible 1.9 users are urged to update to 2.x as soon as
> > possible.
>
> Will the mainline 2 package obsolete the old package to ensure it
> doesn''t hang around?
Well, I am a bit leary of doing that. There may be people using the 1.9
packages that are aware of the security issues and still wish to keep
using it longer for whatever reasons.
It's been a year already... If they really want to do that they they can
just not install the update or configure their system to exclude ansible.
When you retire it'll vanish from the EPEL mirrors anyway due to the east we
handle that so they'd have to get ansible19 from koji anyway for future
installs, or make an internal repo with it... In which case they'll be
configuring their systems for it.
It's not like they'll get any support for 1.9 in any way from Fedora, EPEL
or upstream after all.
Obsoleting does make a lot of sense to me.
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Stephen J Smoogen.
11:25 a.m.
So, I also talked with upstream here... and they didn't seem in favor
of obsoleting either. It's just another annoyance for someone stuck
with 1.9 for whatever good or bad reason.
I suspect (but have no way of knowing) that there really are not too
many 1.9 users anyhow. It would have taken them knowing that that
package existed and explicitly removing the ansible package and
installing it.
kevin
2666
days inactive
2680
days old
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
5 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
James Hogarth -
Kevin Fenzi -
Peter Robinson -
Stephen John Smoogen