FreeNAS development - why are the processes still shaky?

[danb35]

I'm sure based on this thread, they may name the 11.3 BETA branch differently?

If 11.0 and 11.1 (and the ensuing discussion) didn't convince them, I don't see any reason to expect that 11.2 will. But I'd like to be wrong.

 

[diskdiddler]

I don't recall this occurring previously, maybe my memory is bad or I wasn't actively following the news? Did they name 11.0 and 11.1 "stable" branches before they were actually stable?

 

[danb35]

Did they name 11.0 and 11.1 "stable" branches before they were actually stable?

Yes, exactly as they did with 11.2, and exactly the same thing happened (people seeing the train, something in it, and updating, thinking it was the release version). And there was a good bit of discussion here each time.

And you're right--at this point, I wouldn't recommend anyone install a new FreeNAS release on a production system for at least a few weeks (a month or two would be better) after release, to see if it's a dud. Is that what iX wants?

 

[diskdiddler]

In that case, I'd have to agree it's not exactly good practice. I wonder if a train can be renamed after creating it? Then it could be "FN11.3 BETA" - renamed to stable upon completion?

 

[Jailer]

It definitely should NOT appear in the dropdown as stable until it is at release stage. Users should actually have to work to install a beta release, it shouldn't be presented in the GUI.

 

[kdragon75]

The issue is that the 11.2 train is listed as stable and even if you look at the Train Descriptions there's still no hint that this is beta. As far as I'm concerned this is deliberate misinformation.

 

[Bgadd]

@kdragon75 and others

I am going to work with our Release Engineer for Beta2 (set to be released very soon) to put out communication on the forum, but as far as the stable branch, it will not happen until after the final 11.2 proper goes out and we branch for 11.3. The “stable” part of the branch name refers to the state of the kernel/OS, not the code. Here is a brief reasoning behind it....the train name represents the branch that will remain through the lifecycle of the 11.2 series. If we changed the name of the train mid-stream, users would not be able to update from a BETA or RC release. The release notes (in the Update page of the UI and at https://www.ixsystems.com/blog/knowledgebase_category/freenas-release-notes/) indicate if a release is still in the pre-release stage and any known issues with that version.

Here is the ticket in Redmine- https://redmine.ixsystems.com/issues/38660#note-1

There is always room for improvement and this is something that we will investigate to see how we can improve the UI/UX of that updates menus.

I believe this was mentioned earlier, but just in case...I am going to work with our Technical Information Management team to assemble a FAQ forum post/documentation that can help answer some of these type of questions. If time allows before that, we may do an AMA on the forum to collect more questions from the community. Some of the things listed above, such as this being deliberate or using the community as “Beta Testers”, is far from the truth. Yes we depend on and encourage you to download the latest released software, so you can enjoy the features and fixes that are available in the releases.

Also, we give you a way to submit issues that you find, because we know many people run very complex configurations in their environment, and we want to try to make your experience as great as possible. Every single day, someone is reviewing new tickets that are submitted. With our *new* agile approach to things, we will be able to fix those issues even quicker than before.

Lastly, thank you for your invaluable feedback.

-Ben

Ben Gadd MBA
Program Manager
iXsystems

 

[danb35]

The “stable” part of the branch name refers to the state of the kernel/OS, not the code.

...in which case 11.2-BETA1 didn't belong in 11.2-anything at all, since it's running on a FreeBSD 11.1 base. Right?

 

[Kris Moore]

...in which case 11.2-BETA1 didn't belong in 11.2-anything at all, since it's running on a FreeBSD 11.1 base. Right?[/Q

Nope it's running on 11-stable after 11.2-RELEASE. (it's a BSD thing). As for the train names, the old UI doesn't show the description field (unfortunately), which is where we can better indicate if it's beta or not. The reason those names have been picked is so that beta and RC user can stay on that train and upgrade right to release. (And subsequent -Ux releases)

I will talk to the team on how we can make this clearer going forward though and ensure the new UI perhaps displays better details about the state of a train.

 

[danb35]

The reason those names have been picked is so that beta and RC user can stay on that train and upgrade right to release.

...which makes sense, as far as it goes--though it would seem you could have designed your update train system in such a way as to allow this without putting non-STABLE software in a -STABLE train. But the problem is that, with every release since 11.0, a fair number of users have seen the new "11.x-STABLE" train, seen a release in it, and "upgraded" to that release, not realizing that it wasn't, in fact, -STABLE. Your "train descriptions" do nothing to disabuse users of this notion.

I don't conclude that this must be deliberate, nor that you are intentionally using us as beta testers for TrueNAS. But this is a repeated problem, which has seen quite a bit of discussion each of the three (so far) times it's come up. And thus far, nothing has changed.

 

[Jailer]

I still don't think that the beta should be available in the GUI especially in it's current form listed as STABLE until it's at RELEASE status. It does nothing but confuse the average user that it is a stable release. It should have to be manually downloaded and applied if someone wants to run a beta. It's trivial to install the beta to a new USB drive or in a VM and take it for a spin.

 

[Kris Moore]

I still don't think that the beta should be available in the GUI especially in it's current form listed as STABLE until it's at RELEASE status. It does nothing but confuse the average user that it is a stable release. It should have to be manually downloaded and applied if someone wants to run a beta. It's trivial to install the beta to a new USB drive or in a VM and take it for a spin.

I think that's probably what we're ultimately going to end up having to do. The issue is there is no way to hide a train right now. And if we don't set it up, folks on the beta will get errors when trying to update. Anyway, I wasnt aware of this confusion before, but I am now. I'll make sure we address it in a future update.

 

[Kris Moore]

I think that's probably what we're ultimately going to end up having to do. The issue is there is no way to hide a train right now. And if we don't set it up, folks on the beta will get errors when trying to update. Anyway, I wasnt aware of this confusion before, but I am now. I'll make sure we address it in a future update.

We can now track this here: https://redmine.ixsystems.com/issues/39977

 

[Kevin Horton]

What about adding a "Show Beta versions" checkbox in the Updates UI? The checkbox would be unchecked by default. If the checkbox is unchecked, don't show any Release trains that are in Beta. If the user checks this, then show these Release trains. If the current version of the OS is a Beta, that checkbox would be checked, and greyed out to indicate it cannot be unchecked, as you can't back out from Beta to Production. The checkbox would become deselectable once the train had moved to a normal Production version of the OS.

 

[danb35]

The obvious answer would seem to be putting beta/RC releases into a -BETA train rather than -STABLE. It's possible to upgrade from some trains to other trains (e.g., I can go from 11.1-STABLE to 11.2-STABLE), so set the controlling logic so that it's possible to go from 11.2-BETA to 11.2-STABLE.

 

[Patrick M. Hausen]

My wild guess about the -STABLE tag is that they are just following FreeBSD's lead. In no way is -STABLE supposed to imply stable operation. It means "API-Freeze". Stable API, no changes. In FreeBSD the -STABLE tag is created as soon as there is an official feature-frozen BETA.

Patrick

 

[danb35]

My wild guess about the -STABLE tag is that they are just following FreeBSD's lead. In now way is -STABLE supposed to imply stable operation.

Yes, so they've said. Whether that makes sense in BSD-land is outside the scope of this discussion, but I think it's pretty well demonstrated that it does not make sense in FreeNAS land. Especially when the train description says the -STABLE train is, well, stable.

 

[NetSoerfer]

My wild guess about the -STABLE tag is that they are just following FreeBSD's lead. In no way is -STABLE supposed to imply stable operation. It means "API-Freeze". Stable API, no changes. In FreeBSD the -STABLE tag is created as soon as there is an official feature-frozen BETA.

Thank you for that explanation. If you know where to look (FreeBSD Doc), you'll read that STABLE is:

The Release version plus all additional development on that branch. STABLE refers to the Applications Binary Interface (ABI) not changing, so software compiled for earlier versions still runs. For example, software compiled to run on FreeBSD 10.1 will still run on FreeBSD 10-STABLE compiled later.

I find the current version numbering scheme to be extremely confusing, because it is very difficult to distinguish between FreeBSD version numbers and FreeNAS version numbers.

• FreeNAS 11.0 was based on FreeBSD 11.0 (I think)
• FreeNAS 11.1 is based on FreeBSD 11.1
• FreeNAS 11.2 is still based on FreeBSD 11.1, not 11.2

Coupled with the RELEASE and STABLE confusion, I don't think the majority of FreeNAS users will easily keep track of what's what.

An example I struggled with just today: FreeNAS 11.2-BETA1 allows me to create jails based on 11.2-RELEASE. If I finally understood this correctly, that means FreeBSD RELEASE 11.2 - but I naturally assumed this was tied to FreeNAS 11.2 which I was running already. Would 11.2-RELEASE jails even work on a FreeNAS host based on FreeBSD 11.1?

I think it's a bad idea to expose FreeBSD's -STABLE tag in the FreeNAS UI. Using -RELEASE, -RC, -BETA, -NIGHTLY trains (or something similarly self-explanatory) would clarify things a lot, maybe with a clearly separated indicator of the base FreeBSD version, e.g. "FreeNAS 11.2-BETA1 (FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE)" or something.

 

[kdragon75]

Would 11.2-RELEASE jails even work on a FreeNAS host based on FreeBSD 11.1?

Nope.

I think it's a bad idea to expose FreeBSD's -STABLE tag in the FreeNAS UI. Using -RELEASE, -RC, -BETA, -NIGHTLY trains (or something similarly self-explanatory) would clarify things a lot, maybe with a clearly separated indicator of the base FreeBSD version, e.g. "FreeNAS 11.2-BETA1 (FreeBSD 11.1-STABLE)" or something.

This.

 

[danb35]

FreeNAS 11.2 is still based on FreeBSD 11.1, not 11.2

I believe this will be changed with -BETA2 (which seems an enormous change from one beta to the next, but what do I know?).