On 10/01/2014 04:46 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote:
> On 10/1/14, 11:53 AM, "Morgan Fainberg" <morgan.fainb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, October 1, 2014, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote:
>> As stable branches got discussed recently, I'm kind of curious who is
>> actually stepping up to make icehouse able to pass tests in any real
>> way. Because right now I've been trying to fix devstack icehouse so that
>> icehouse requirements can be unblocked (and to land code that will
>> reduce grenade failures)
>> I'm on retry #7 of modifying the tox.ini file in devstack.
>> During the last summit people said they wanted to support icehouse for
>> 15 months. Right now we're at 6 months and the tree is basically unable
>> to merge code.
>> So who is actually standing up to fix these things, or are we going to
>> just leave it broken and shoot icehouse in the head early?
>>        -Sean
>> --
>> Sean Dague
>> http://dague.net
>> We should stick with the longer support for Icehouse in my opinion. I'll
>> happily volunteer time to help get it back into shape.
>> The other question is will Juno *also* have extended stable support? Or
>> is it more of an LTS style thing (I'm not a huge fan of the LTS model,
>> but it is easier in some regards). If every release is getting extended
>> support, we may need to look at our tool
>> chains so we can better support the releases.
>> Cheers,
>> Morgan 
>> Sent via mobile  
> Would ever release need to be LTS or would every other release (or every
> 4th) release be LTS? We could consider a policy like Ubuntu’s (e.g., 10.04
> 12.04, 14.04 are all LTS and the next will be 16.04).

Before thinking about LTS policy we should actually think about having a
tree that you can land code in... because today, you can't with icehouse.

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/125075/ is on recheck #7 - still failing.

Note, this is *after* we turned off the 2 highest failing tests on
icehouse as well to alleviate the issue.


Sean Dague

OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to