[SRU] MAAS 2.4.0beta3 to bionic

[Andres Rodriguez]

We would like to request a SRU for MAAS 2.4. This follows the draft SRU exception process described at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MAASUpdates

[Impact]
This is a new version of MAAS only provides bugfixes that improve the stability of 2.4.

[Regression Potential]
MAAS 2.4b3, among other improvements, provides various stability issues mainly in HA environments. It improves the UI performance, and fixes various regressions due to the transition to a newer version of vanilla that are in 2.4b2 (currently in the archive).

Both 2.4b2 (in the archive) and 2.4b3 are affected by [1], [2], but have only been seen in CI environments.

[1]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/maas/+bug/1764830
[2]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/maas/+bug/1758193

Tests done:

1. Upgraded a production lab from 2.4b2 to 2.4b3.

2. MAAS CI Lab:
 - Tests Installation (from pkgs), configuration / customization of MAAS, enlistment, commissioning. It also tests deployments with Juju.
 - Tests various API's
 - Tests are performed against Xenial

3. Other manual testing include:
 - Installation (both fresh and upgrades)
 - Configuration
 - Taking nodes through the lifecycle for regression testing.
 - Custom configuration to ensure proper operation.

Changes:

https://launchpad.net/maas/2.4/2.4.0beta3

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

Per https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MAASUpdates:

The SRU should be done with a single process bug, instead of individual bug reports for individual bug fixes. The one bug should have the following:
[...]
 * Packaging changes (e.g. dependency changes) need to be stated in debian/changelog.

debdiff uploaded includes:

-Depends: rsyslog,
+Depends: avahi-utils,
+ rsyslog,

This needs explained in debian/changelog.

debian/python3-django-maas.lintian-overrides is an added file. There is no explanation of whether this is a change for suppressing new lintian errors, or existing errors, or why it is correct to suppress these lintian errors.

debian/source/lintian-overrides is similar.

Rejecting the current upload based on the above.

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

An upload of maas to bionic-proposed has been rejected from the upload queue for the following reason: "https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/maas/+bug/1768800/comments/1".

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

Andres,

> 1. Upgraded a production lab from 2.4b2 to 2.4b3.

This reads to me that you tested that the upgrade of the packages was possible. What testing was done to validate the correctness of the behavior of 2.4b3 post-upgrade?

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

The [Regression potential] section should provide hints about what kinds of regressions are considered most likely given the changes that have been made to the codebase, not just "minimal". a 12kloc diff probably has /some/ changes in it that you can conceive of possibly having an impact.

[Łukasz Zemczak (sil2100)]

I am still not really comfortable with the regression potential analysis here. Similarly to Steve I would like to see some investigation of which parts could be in theory affected with regressions after this lands in the archive. Also, since it's not entirely clear from the current description, what tests will be performed after the packages are built in -proposed?