FYI I just opened a grievance to remind what we did today is exceptional and to be avoided in future:
https://jira.opendaylight.org/browse/TSC-92 <https://jira.opendaylight.org/browse/TSC-92> BR/Luis > On Apr 19, 2018, at 11:44 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected]> wrote: > > Added the TSC. > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 11:41 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Robert & Tom, > > Regardless of the merits of this particular change, I agree with Vishal & > Luis that this is a failure of communication. The weather process needed to > have been followed - with the possibility for downstream projects to not > accept the change for legitimate reasons. Please do so in the future. > > The most ideal solution as suggested by Luis below & initially agreed by Tom > would have been to back out the change, discuss it completely (in a the TWS > call) and go ahead with the decision after the TWS call. As it stands, and > pointed by Tom, backing out the change looks to be a daunting task. Since > that is the case, let us do the following: > 0) Unblock the projects by whatever means - whether it is projects merging > the changes to accommodate the original patch or reverting > 1) Robert, please create the weather report with the existing change > 2) in the meantime people can chime in on the thread and try to resolve it > 3) we WILL continue the discussion on the Monday TWS if this is not resolved > by Monday. Casey has this meeting scheduled in any case. > > Thanks, > Abhijit > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Luis Gomez <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> On Apr 19, 2018, at 7:16 AM, Tom Pantelis <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Vishal Thapar <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Hi Robert, >> >> Could you please take a look at tell what I need to fix this breakage? I am >> still not sure why is such a basic code breaking like this. >> >> >> Perhaps we should just revert the mdsal patch until this can get sorted out >> downstream - maybe discuss on the TSC call today . > > +1, without knowing the technical details of the change, I think we are > missing something fundamental in the upstream-downstream communication: in > general for any valid change coming from upstream breaking downstream we need > a weather report including explanation why the change is required and some > pointers on how to fix the potential failures. This gives a chance for > downstream projects to evaluate and accept the change as well as to prepare > the required patches to minimize the impact. If the breakage was > unintentional or unexpected (no weather fired), I think the right thing to do > is to revert and start over writing the weather report. > >> >> >> Regards, >> Vishal. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mdsal-dev mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/mdsal-dev >> <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/mdsal-dev> > > > _______________________________________________ > openflowplugin-dev mailing list > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev > <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev> > > > > _______________________________________________ > openflowplugin-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
_______________________________________________ openflowplugin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
