On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 6:43 AM, Dmitry Tantsur <dtant...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 10/10/2016 11:34 PM, Tony Breeds wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 08:42:48AM +0200, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: >> >>> I think it would also make sense to *release* on the boundary of the >>> switch; >>> so that it’s clear which phase a release followed. >> >> >> I agree, I don't really have a mechanism for do that though. I didn't >> state >> this but my plan was to reach out the PTLs that have the >> stable:follows-policy >> tag and ask them to release. I suppose I could go one step further and >> propose the change in openstack/releases but that seems a little like over >> reach to me. >> >> What do PTLs / stable CPLs think? > > > +1 to the idea. > > I see that many Ironic projects only have global requirements updates since > the last release. Should we request a release as well?
Yeah, I think it's worth a release so we can get those packaged up with the correct dependencies. // jim __________________________________________________________________________ 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
