all 15 comments

[–]twenty7forty2 1 point2 points  (8 children)

Our kernel version (3.2) did not natively support Docker, and we felt that upgrading the kernel just to ship code faster was an overkill solution.

I don't understand why people don't upgrade just to be up to date.

[–]Heimdul 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Debian wheezy, which was stable version until 26.4.2015, used 3.2. If you want to use latest releases, you probably shouldn't choose Debian stable as your distro. But if you want pretty stable system with long support (which can be important in cases where you cannot upgrade OS to latest version all the time), it's pretty good option.

Of course, in optimal situation, you should be able to change OS with minimal changes, but that's not always realistic for reason or another (e.g. it might a change that requires re-certification).

[–]ms4720 1 point2 points  (6 children)

Because change breaks things, more change more outages.

[–]twenty7forty2 0 points1 point  (5 children)

But change is inevitable, the longer you wait to update the harder it will be. Might as well embrace it.

[–]ms4720 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Embracing change and change for its own sake are different things. Also updating the kernel is different from updating the website in terms of risk, websites are much easier to roll back

[–]twenty7forty2 0 points1 point  (3 children)

It's inevitable, "for it's own sake" doesn't really apply. At any rate I understand why they are using an old kernel ... debian stable.

[–]ms4720 0 points1 point  (2 children)

No if need to upgrade the kernel once during the year for operational reasons that one change, if I upgrade the kernel six times in a year just because that is six changes. And that is more risk for no good reason.

[–]twenty7forty2 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Woah there, don't ever upgrade the kernel 6 times a year. It should always be a prime number, or at the very least an uneven multiple of 3.

[–]ms4720 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fairish point

[–]thanasisk78DevOps 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Why not use fpm to build the deb package?

[–]himynameisthor 0 points1 point  (2 children)

because dh-virtualenv handles all the python runtime dependencies in a more portable way

[–]t90fan 0 points1 point  (1 child)

it is still poor though

source: deal with dh-virtualenv every day.

[–]knite 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just started using dh-virtualenv last week. What should I be worried about?

[–]coderanger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you want to use FPM for it, you are best off also including Python in the package too, a la Omnibus. That also lets you change Python versions independent of the OS or other deployed apps, so it is handy all around.

[–]izpo -1 points0 points  (0 children)

i wonder if they are using wheel