On Dec 13, 2017, at 4:31 PM, Doug Hellmann <d...@doughellmann.com> wrote:
> You're missing the key point that coupled with the change in the > overall development cycle schedule we would be encouraging projects > to release more often. I'd personally rather do away with milestones > altogether and just tag everything monthly, but some projects may > not be ready to do that and some may want to go more often (libraries > in particular). I think you're missing the reality that intermediate releases have about zero uptake in the real world. We have had milestone releases of Nova for years, but I challenge you to find me one non-trivial deployment that uses one of them. To my knowledge, based on user surveys, it is only the major 6-month named releases that are deployed, and even then, some time after their release. Integrated releases make sense for deployers. What does it mean if Nova has some new stuff, but it requires a new release from Cinder in order to use it, and Cinder hasn't yet released the necessary updates? Talking about releasing projects on a monthly-tagged basis just dumps the problem of determining what works with the rest of the codebase onto the deployers. -- Ed Leafe
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
