James E. Blair wrote:
> Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> writes:
>> I also disagree with the proposed solution. We announced a support
>> timeframe for Icehouse, our downstream users made plans around it, so we
>> should stick to it as much as we can.
> To be fair, if we did that, we did not communicate accurately the
> sentiment of the room at the Kilo summit.  From:
>   https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-summit-ops-stable-branch
>   Stable branches starting with stable/icehouse are intended to be
>   supported for 15 months (previously it was 9 months), but it depends
>   on the community dedicating resources to maintain stable/*
> There was definitely skepticism in that room.  I would characterize it
> as something like "some people wanted 15 months" and other people said
> "that is unlikely to happen based on our track record".  I think the
> consensus was akin to "okay, we'll try it and see what happens but no
> promises".

I think you are confusing two etherpads there. That was the Ops summit
session etherpad (I was in that room, and tried to encourage people to
step up there by adding that note to the etherpad).

I suspect the room you want to express the "sentiment" or "skepticism"
from was the Design Summit one, which had *this* etherpad:


Thierry Carrez (ttx)

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to