-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Any release plans? 5.12.1 or 5.13.0 or 6.0.0 ? #4186
Comments
Hi @hnyman, that's an excellent question and I think we should have a community discussion about next steps and where we focus our energy.
|
@mrunge What do you think? |
IMHO:
|
Syncing all deviating changes is quite a tall order, given that |
I would suggest to merge the main branch into the 5.13 branch. It was created earlier and then abandoned. I also agree with @eero-t that we should sync the ci fixes into the 5.12 branch to allow distributions to pick up the changes. Tbh. I have no good overview at this time on the 6.0 status. |
If What are your feelings about reinstating the collectd community call? It would give us a place where we can discuss these things and give status updates. |
Looking at individual commits is relevant only for plugins that have already been ported to 6.0 API. I think majority still has not been? For ones that still have not been migrated to 6.0 API, their latest code in (I think hnez did that for the plugins that he ported to 6.0 API.) |
I looked into merging plugin changes from
The plugins that can easily be updated are:
I have created a PR for these: #4198 The diverged plugins are:
I haven't looked into this yet, but I suspect that these will run into a fair amount of merge conflicts. |
Ouch, I hadn't realized v6 was branched from For the plugins with just 1 new commit in
|
Links to some of the patches distros are using on top of current 5.12 release:
@mrunge, maybe you can comment on whether any of the Fedora patches are still needed with CI fixes in (I.e. will CI fixes be enough for 5.12.1 release, or is something else also missing.) |
On quick look at the Debian patches, they are fixed in |
I just merged the Perl CGI fix. |
@octo Early this year Leonard checked and updated several plugins in v6 branch to latest changes from |
I created the 6 MVP Milestone to track the things I think we need to get done before packaging our first collectd 6 release. Please take a look. |
I started drafting a 6.0 release candidate at https://github.com/collectd/collectd/releases/edit/untagged-54315dd568937fe38d17 |
@octo I assume this is list of changes compared to latest (v5) release before it. Of the significant v5->v6 changes that above list is missing, I can right away name at least:
(Last one is based on @manuelluis work, but @hnez did lot of checking before those old PRs were merged, so I think it's fair to attribute that to him: #4026 (comment)) As to plugin changes, while there have been quite a few PRs to Sysman plugin after I added it, IMHO those latter ones do not need to be explicitly listed in the changes, as plugin was not in any release. PS. Of the significant fixes in v5 that should be added to v6 before any -rc release, I would propose at least your fix to missing |
This is based on me grep'ing through the commit history to find PRs: git log --pretty=oneline "main..collectd-6.0" | egrep 'Merge pull request #([1-9][0-9]*)' The PRs you mentioned have been merged manually, probably because the automatic builders were broken. Unfortunately I don't think we can get a list of PRs since the last release from the GitHub API. We can get a list of PRs using the |
Cherry-picked that into |
Okay, I'm getting this list. Does that look better? https://github.com/octo/collectd/releases/tag/untagged-e88ba30fd34c7c8e5dce |
Merged ones with "[collectd 6]" in title:
Not found? |
List content looks better to me now. Please sort the list and split it at least to "Core" & "Plugin changes" sections, so that related changes are easier to find. Note: if you add PR number after the component name (at the beginning) instead of at end, then the list will naturally sort both by the component, and the order in which changes to it were done. Overview of the major user visible changes in the release would be nice at the start. Maybe something like this:
=> It's better if Wiki metrics table lists in separate column(s) the new metrics names also for each write plugin which cannot output OTEL names as-is. |
Good news everyone! All PRs in the "6.0 MVP" milestone have been merged! That means my next goal is to get collectd 6 into some users' hands. I created new draft release notes. Please take a look. |
The latest listed release is 5.12.0 |
Okay, I'll tag it once #4251 is in. |
Looks good! IMHO following would still be good items to highlight in overviews for all releases up to final one:
I.e. have direct link to metric changes (updates one needs to do in Grafana dashboard etc), and reason for such breaking changes. |
I have created the 6.0.0.rc0 release, uploaded new tarballs, updated the website, and sent an announcement email. |
No need for overview section, "Read plugins" section has link to Wiki, which has link to OTEL info.
But this info could be added to the "Write plugins" section, as it's a major behavior change for all of them. |
Wiki is missing some of the changes: https://github.com/collectd/collectd/wiki/collectd-6 Config option names were changed for all plugins with changed metrics, not just memory plugin (I still disagree with the Usage/Utilization option names, and would much prefer Absolute/Ratio instead though). |
I'd like to manage expectations: My primary focus is collectd 6, at least for the time being. I'm happy to review changes going into collectd 5, and/or to create and publish a 5.12 or 5.13 release, but I'm most likely not going to invest engineering effort myself. |
I'm also really interested only in v6, but I'm fairly sure (most of) those v5 issues are also in v6. While most plugins still have not been ported to v6 APIs / have v6-specific changes, it IMHO it makes more sense to fix the issue in v5 and then merge fix to v6. As I do not think any of those to be a regression from previous release, I think it's more important just to get 5.13 release out though. The bugs fixes since 5.12 (released 3.5 years ago!) indicate that many users could have some issues in continuing using that with latest compilers and dependencies, meaning that they would face choice between building |
Btw. @octo do you have some time target, or a list of items that you think should be solved for "final" 6.0 release, e.g. subset of most important plugins that should be ported to the new v6 APIs and OTEL metric naming? (I have some time still to help with the release during this quarter, but unlikely to have much after that, so I'm wondering whether there's any way v6.0 can happen before that...) |
Not really. I think #4273 (processes plugin) should be in a "final" 6.0 release. One idea that has been floating around in my head was to create a user survey asking which plugins people relied on. We could then try to ensure that the new version support some percentage of these use-cases. I'm not really sure how to structure the survey though: listing all 176 plugins may be hard to navigate for users, free text fields are very hard to evaluate, and mixing the two (list what we think to be the most popular plugins + provide an "other" text box) introduces bias. I'd be happy to hear more perspectives on this. There are a few things that would be really nice to have:
I'm torn what to do with the "disabled" plugins (list below). On the one hand, I don't think we should ship with dead code and it would be quite easy to
Okay, so waiting for collectd 6 to have feature parity with collectd 5 is a recipe for failure. I think we have to define a "good enough" state and just run with it. My gut feeling is that we're almost there. I assume by "this quarter" you mean January through March. I think that it's definitely possible to arrive at a "good enough" state by then. List of disabled plugins
|
I think check box list of all plugins is fine, as long as they're presented reasonably so that user can easily find ones that are relevant for him (in alphabetical order, preferably in few colums so that one sees all at a glance). What / how many questions should be asked about the plugins?
It may also be important to ask something like this...
Last one is about whether there's some subset of plugins which would be useful to still support, but not to migrate them to new APIs, at least yet.
On quick look at the issue & PR titles, E.g. (Python plugin may be important one for potential contributors to test things.)
Yes, but I'll need to start winding down things already as there are other things I need to finish before end of quarter (which I've been post-poning). |
Discussed with my manager, and while I don't have much time for collectd in March, I should have some time again after it => release happening after Q1 should be fine. (There are also some internal processes that I may need to go through before collectd release, so release coming a bit later is actually better from my point of view.) |
Is the possible release process progressing? Ps.
|
@hnyman collectd releases (and collectd progress in general) depend on @octo, but he's been active here last in (early) April... :-/
There are 35 open tickets mentioning And last update to it was 5 years ago:
Could any of those users consider:
|
Any news regarding a release? At the beginning of the year it looked a little bit like conference driven development might accelerate things... (No offense, just asking.) |
It is now over 3 years since the last release, 5.12.0.
Looking at the current branches, I am totally confused on how the development is going on and if there are any release plans?
From what I have followed collectd from "use for OpenWrt perspective" for over a decade, the development is currently somewhat stuck, and a "big change"(?) for 6.0 will likely take quite long ?
There are currently four branches that have seen commits this year:
Four differing branches are a lot.
Especially when only 5.12 has been released and both 5.13 and 6.0 are unreleased release branches.
Differences between 5.12 and 5.13 are minimal, so the role of 5.13 branch is a puzzle.
Also, main and 6.0 have differed quite a lot. Why? Is main going to be 5.14?
Could there be a 5.12.1 maintenance release or a 5.13 release while waiting for 6.0?
Are both 5.12 and 5.13 really needed, if 5.13 is never going to be released?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: