On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:31 AM, Thierry Carrez <[email protected]>wrote:
> Robert Collins wrote: > > I don't understand why branches would be needed here *if* the breaking > > changes don't impact any supported release of OpenStack. > > Right -- the trick is what does "supported" mean in that case. > > When the client libraries were first established as separate > deliverables, they came up with a blanket statement that the latest > version could always be used with *any* version of openstack you may > have. The idea being, if some public cloud was still stuck in pre-diablo > times, you could still use the same library to address both this public > cloud and the one which was 2 weeks behind Havana HEAD. > I'm curious about the historical circumstance of this requirement -- were the services supported "master, minus two releases" at the time? We're not testing more than two stable releases against the latest clients in CI today, so I find it odd that we still bother with this claim, without demonstrating that it's true. > > -- > Thierry Carrez (ttx) > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -- -Dolph
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
