Background/Motivation:
----------------------
As more users and developers move toward deploying their local
environments via OOOQ, the need for a rock solid undercloud image
has increased. Personally, I have observed frustrations from
end users spending cycles attempting to deploy release X
with OOOQ only to watch it fail due to a bad image. As a workaround,
they are opting to leave up and re-use existing deployments for
extended periods of time. This is not an option if they are attempting to
test out new features/fixes that require changes to OOOQ/OOOQ-Extras.
Furthermore, while `force_cached_images` is an option, it is not always
an optimal solution and is not even an option if deploying in a fresh
environment.
Proposed change:
----------------
Provide a standardized way of accessing a known good (not bleeding edge)
undercloud image that may be used during OOOQ deployments.
Desired outcome:
----------------
Either via a new flag, or special release config, users can opt
to deploy with a known good undercloud image.
Open questions/Considerations:
------------------------------
* How do we determine a known good undercloud image?
* Where do we host a known good image(s)?
* Do we provide a known good image for non-master versions?
This is an automated cleanup. This bug report has been closed because it
is older than 18 months and there is no open code change to fix this.
After this time it is unlikely that the circumstances which lead to
the observed issue can be reproduced.
If you can reproduce the bug, please:
* reopen the bug report (set to status "New")
* AND add the detailed steps to reproduce the issue (if applicable)
* AND leave a comment "CONFIRMED FOR: <RELEASE_NAME>"
Only still supported release names are valid (FUTURE, PIKE, QUEENS, ROCKY, STEIN).
Valid example: CONFIRMED FOR: FUTURE