On 06/09/2015 04:54 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2015-06-09 10:55:55 +0200 (+0200), Thomas Goirand wrote: > [...] >> That's far from being in place. Also, while we are removing point >> releases, and support for Icehouse, we still don't have a common private >> Gerrit for security, which we've been told about 2 years ago. >> >> Removing collaboration tools before new ones are in place is >> definitively not the way to go. > [...] > > In the stable branch management session at the Liberty summit, the > Infrastructure Team position was confirmed that we can't maintain > non-supported branches in a second Gerrit any more than we can in > the primary one. The idea that there might be some branch of an > OpenStack project which we just give up on testing but keep > available for new changes is distasteful from a quality perspective. > If there is sufficient interest from distro representatives in > collaborating upstream on backports to, for example, stable/icehouse > then that interest needs to include the resources necessary to > maintain sufficient testing upstream (as defined by the upstream > community).
Jeremy, I have made a round table in Paris, and I have names of interested people who would work on this. But without a collaboration tool (and at least a common Git repository to work on), it is going to be harder to work on together. > So, I'm sorry, but don't look to an OpenStack-maintained non-public > code review system as a workaround for continuing to collaborate in > private on branches unsupported upstream in public. Most of the time > it ends up being non-distro upstream developers (quality assurance, > release management, infrastructure, vulnerability management, > individual projects) who bear the majority of the responsibility for > keeping testing working on those branches and we're clearly at our > breaking point now trying to maintain three besides our master > branch. I understand, and I haven't asked the VMT or anyone upstream to work on this. > If the interested distributions come back with teams of people to > dedicate to this work, which means getting deeply embedded in the > groups who currently maintain the existing testing and release > management for stable branches and are currently understaffed for > that effort, then we can certainly revisit the number of branches > we're able to maintain in both the public and (future) embargoed > security review systems. As we discussed, the goal isn't to maintain upstream CI, but to have a place to share our work between distributions. We would do the testing downstream, not using OpenStack infra. Please get this security gerrit up, so that we can work on a patch during the embargo period. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo) __________________________________________________________________________ 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