> On Feb 10, 2015, at 9:21 AM, Dean Troyer wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Kevin Bringard (kevinbri)
> wrote:
> ATC is only being given to folks committing to the current branch
> (https://ask.openstack.org/en/question/45531/atc-pass-for-the-openstack-summit/).
>
> Secondly, it'
On 2015-02-10 10:21:58 -0600 (-0600), Dean Troyer wrote:
[...]
> ATC credit should be given, stable branch maintenance is a
> contribution to the project, no question.
[...]
Just to keep this particular misconception from spinning out of
control, as I mentioned elsewhere in this thread they absolu
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
The voice of operators/users/deployers in this conversation should be reflected
through the entity that they are paying to provide operational cloud services.
Let’s be careful here: I hope you didn’t mean to say that
operators/users/deployers vo
On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 15:20 +, Kevin Bringard (kevinbri) wrote:
> I've been talking with a few people about this very thing lately, and
> I think much of it is caused by what appears to be our actively
> discouraging people from working on it. Most notably, ATC is only
> being given to folks co
>
> > Secondly, it's difficult to get stack-analytics credit for back
> > ports, as the preferred method is to cherry pick the code, and
> > that keeps the original author's name. I've personally gotten a
> > few commits into stable, but have nothing to show for it in
> > stack-analytics (if I'm do
On 2015-02-10 15:20:46 + (+), Kevin Bringard (kevinbri) wrote:
[...]
> I've been talking with a few people about this very thing lately,
> and I think much of it is caused by what appears to be our
> actively discouraging people from working on it. Most notably, ATC
> is only being given to
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Kevin Bringard (kevinbri) <
kevin...@cisco.com> wrote:
> ATC is only being given to folks committing to the current branch (
> https://ask.openstack.org/en/question/45531/atc-pass-for-the-openstack-summit/
> ).
> Secondly, it's difficult to get stack-analytics c
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
The sentiment that Kevin is expressing here has come up informally at past
Operator’s meetups as well, which makes sense given that relatively few
operators are chasing trunk vs using a stable rele
Since this is sort of a topic change, I opted to start a new thread. I was
reading over the "Juno is Fubar at the Gate" thread, and this bit stood out to
me:
> > So I think it's time we called the icehouse branch and marked it EOL. We
> > originally conditioned the longer support window on extra
