That all sounds reasonable. I think it's fine to assume we won't do a 2.14.4 unless there is an emergency.
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Patrick Creech <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 15:08 -0500, Jeremy Audet wrote: > > Do you think it will be possible to push an emergency 2.14.4 build out > the door if necessary? Or > > an emergency 2.13.z build? I love the idea of throwing away old > processes that are weighing us > > down. But there are business needs to consider. > > With the maturation of 2.14, I don't see an upstream case to push a 2.13 > build at this point, and I > haven't heard any requests for one. > > Otherwise, what is exceptional is exceptional. I don't plan on removing > all traces of the build > scripts and jobs that produce these, just turning them off. If an > exceptional case arises upstream > then a discussion could be had. > > I just think it will be a good idea here to provide a clean upstream line > to switch, so as to keep > the confusion about what to do at a minimum for all parties invovled. > > Thanks, > Patrick > _______________________________________________ > Pulp-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev > > -- Michael Hrivnak Principal Software Engineer, RHCE Red Hat
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
