Track removal: mysql-router

charmhub requests
1

Hi there!

The mysql-router charm has a couple of tracks that do not have, and will never have, a published revision. They are:

  • 5.7, which refers to a MySQL very old LTS version.
  • 8.2, which refers to a MySQL innovation version between 8.0 and 8.4, both LTS.

I have tried removing such tracks using the charmcraft CLI, but apparently I do not have permissions. I have also tried visualizing these tracks in the Charmhub UI, but the backend keeps responding with a HTTP 500 code…

I am writing this message on behalf of Canonical MySQL team (cc @paulomachado)

Thanks in advance.

2

Hi,

I have tried removing such tracks using the charmcraft CLI, but apparently I do not have permissions

Can you please elaborate on this? We don’t really remove/delete tracks but you should be able to close them by yourself with charmcraft close.

I have also tried visualizing these tracks in the Charmhub UI, but the backend keeps responding with a HTTP 500 code…

I can confirm that I get a 502 as well here. I’ll communicate this to the web team for them to take a closer look.

Br,

Odysseus

3

Can you please elaborate on this? We don’t really remove/delete tracks but you should be able to close them by yourself with charmcraft close.

$ charmcraft close mysql-router 5.7
$ > Store operation failed:
$ > permission-required: Channel access not allowed
$ > Full execution log: '...'
4

It looks like you’re missing the appropriate permissions for this package. Are you the owner or a collaborator for the charm?

Also, do you get the same error if you do e.g. charmcraft close mysql-router 5.7/edge?

Br,

Odysseus

5

As far as I know, this charm has been traditionally owned by the… OpenStack team? Not 100% sure, I just know who is responsible for the team: Billy Olsen (thanks @taurus for the pointer). So, it makes sense that we, Charm MySQL team, do not have permissions to manage it.

Nevertheless, I am convinced that nothing will ever be published in the 5.7 or 8.2 tracks. As we just published MySQL Router 8.4, which is the next LTS version (see 8.4/edge channel). Please, help us clean-up those old tracks.

Also, do you get the same error if you do e.g. charmcraft close mysql-router 5.7/edge?

Exact same error.

6

charmcraft close is a publisher operation so someone from your side, with the appropriated level of permissions should be able to close it. I confirmed that this charm is owned by mysql-charmers and digging a bit more into the history here, I found a similar request for closing the dpe channels raised by @paulomachado some time ago. I think he is on your team so perhaps his account has the permission to do this.

7

I think he is on your team so perhaps his account has the permission to do this.

Yes, Paulo is my manager.

I just had a 1:1 session with him, where he tried to close the unused tracks (i.e. 5.7 and 8.2), and discovered that he does not have permissions either.

However, we tried using a bot credentials that we have, within Data Platform department, to close those tracks, and apparently the command worked. I am saying apparently because even though we got a successful response via CLI, the tracks still show up when running charmcraft status mysql-router. Not sure if there is any kind of cache involved, but we will appreciate if you could validate this from your end.

The CharmHub list of channels for this very specific charm keeps returning an HTTP 500 error. Please ping us whenever you have updates about this topic.

8

but we will appreciate if you could validate this from your end.

I didn’t find any errors or warnings in our logs indicating any unexpected side effects during the close operation. Unfortunately, running charmcraft status mysql-router on my end returns no results, as I don’t have publisher or collaborator permissions for that package. That said, I reproduced the same scenario with one of my own charms and can confirm that the close operation removed the revision from the closed channel:

charmcraft status <my-package>
Track    Base    Channel    Version    Revision
latest   -       stable     -          -
                 candidate  -          -
                 beta       3          3
                 edge       2          2
v.1      -       stable     -          -
                 candidate  -          -
                 beta       -          -
                 edge       2          2

charmcraft close <my_package> v.1/edge
Closed 'v.1/edge' channel for <my_package>.

charmcraft status <my-package>
Track    Base    Channel    Version    Revision
latest   -       stable     -          -
                 candidate  -          -
                 beta       3          3
                 edge       2          2
v.1      -       stable     -          -
                 candidate  -          -
                 beta       -          -
                 edge       -          -

The channel is closed. The track still appears in the output, which I believe is intentional and consistent with how the Charmcraft team designed the status command to work.

The CharmHub list of channels for this very specific charm keeps returning an HTTP 500 error.

I spoke with the Web team about this. They confirmed that this behavior is intentional when the user accessing the page lacks the necessary permissions. However, they will raise this internally to see whether the error response can be improved going forward.

9

Thanks for the quick response!

The channel is closed. The track still appears in the output, which I believe is intentional and consistent with how the Charmcraft team designed the status command to work.

So, if I understood it correctly, the unused tracks will continue to be shown when running the charmcraft status mysql-router command, correct?

This is surprising, as we know for a fact that this is not the case with the Snap store (raised a similar request last month). It seems to be a behavior drift between the two tools (snapcraft vs charmcraft) or stores (snap-store vs charmhub).

They confirmed that this behavior is intentional when the user accessing the page lacks the necessary permissions.

Got it. The problem them is in the ownership of such charm then.

Will speak with my manager about it.