Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-09-18 16:08:04 +0200:
> Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:
> > Release team,
> > 
> > At one point Doug had indicated all projects would automatically branch
> > on tagging of rc1.  I notice in git no Kolla stable/newton branch
> > exists. Fwiw this is actually a good thing, because 33 patches have
> > merged since rc1 relating to things that need to go into Newton,
> > dramatically reducing the amount of backport work we need to do.  Part
> > of this was error on my part – not validating all FFE blueprints that
> > were marked Implemented were actually implemented.  One related to
> > monitoring (and part of the 33 patches since rc1) was actually “Needs
> > Review” rather than Implemented (as it was marked).
> > 
> > I don’t want Kolla to be a special snowflake wrt release processes, and
> > we can live with a branch on rc1.  A branch on rc2 would be far better
> > for us as we have roughly 250 bugs to triage or fix.  I leave it in the
> > release team’s capable judgement to decide best on a course of action.
> I'm probably the one to blame for that. Kolla follows milestones but is
> trailing the release, which makes it a bit of a release snowflake. I
> wasn't sure we should cut the stable branch at RC1 for such a case
> (since you're still far away from final).
> We should discuss what to do here (branch ASAP, branch at RC2...) on
> Monday on the release channel when Doug is around.

As we discussed on IRC today, it seems reasonable to give the trailing
projects a bit more flexibility when we get to the RC period. Let us
know which RC should form the basis of the branch and we'll create it


> > I would request that the expected time of branch be communicated clearly
> > to us for the Newton cycle.  I have been communicating with our team
> > that rc1 is where we branch.  Folks are now asking “where is the Newton
> > branch of Kolla?”
> FWIW Doug has been working on a spec so that projects communicate more
> clearly when they want the release branch to be cut. For
> milestone-driven projects it's usually clear (we branch at RC1), but for
> other cases (intermediary-released, trailing) options are a bit more
> open so having a way (through the openstack/releases repo) to clearly
> communicate "when" will definitely help.

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

Reply via email to