Excerpts from Steven Dake (stdake)'s message of 2016-07-01 18:42:47 +0000: > > On 7/1/16, 11:18 AM, "Doug Hellmann" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2016-07-01 13:50:30 +0000: > >> On 2016-07-01 11:24:27 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> > Short answer is: release:managed doesn't mean that much anymore (all > >> > official projects are "managed"), so we'll likely retire it ASAP. > >> [...] > >> > >> If the meaning has been reduced to "this project is allowed to > >> request tagging by the Release Management team" then I agree it's no > >> longer necessary since any official project _can_ do that. If the > >> meaning is "this project is _only_ allowed to be tagged by the > >> Release Management team" then I can still see some use for it, since > >> there are plenty of official projects that currently follow their > >> own independent release process and push their own tags instead. > > > >I've been telling folks throughout this cycle that we weren't going to > >add the "managed" tag to any new projects because we were considering > >redefining the tag and we would want to do that first. While discussing > >how to redefine it, we realized its meaning is now covered by other > >tags, so we've proposed to drop it instead [1]. > > > >The "release:managed" tag used to convey information about how much > >the release team did for the project team in a way that was (we > >hoped) useful to consumers of the project. That included things we > >no longer do at all for anyone, like update bug milestones and > >upload artifacts to launchpad, as well as things that are now encoded > >in the other release tags like "perform the tagging of the release". > > > >At the start of this cycle we updated the gerrit ACLs so that all > >projects using a cycle-with* release model *must* have the release > >team process their releases (if we have any such projects who we > >missed, or who were added later and not updated, we need to fix > >that). Projects using the independent release model may process > >their own releases or may ask the release team to do it. Either > >way, since those projects are by definition not part of the cycle > >releases we don't consider it "interesting" to their consumers to > >say who is actually doing the releases (feedback on that assumption > >is of course welcome). > > > >Doug > > > >[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/335440/ > > Doug, > > Thanks for the response. I understand where your coming from; I had also > thought the release:managed tag was meaningless at this point, but hey - > its a tag so I had planned to apply for it since we meet the criteria > (which as far as I can tell means following the freeze model - everything > else is enforced by the ACL change that happened at the end of Mitaka (or > whenever that was)). > > Since it is being removed, we won't apply. > > Thanks for helping get to the bottom of this :)
Sure, and sorry about the delay -- it just happened that all of the release team was out of touch this week for different reasons. Doug > > Regards > -steve > > > > >__________________________________________________________________________ > >OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > >Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
