-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 18/08/14 11:00, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>> [...] I don't see how any self-respecting open-source project can
>> throw a release over the wall and have no ability to address
>> critical bugs with that release until the next r
Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> [...]
> I don't see how any self-respecting open-source project can throw a
> release over the wall and have no ability to address critical bugs with
> that release until the next release 6 months later which will also
> include a bunch of new feature work with new bugs. Th
On Tue, 2014-07-29 at 14:04 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Ihar Hrachyshka a écrit :
> > On 29/07/14 12:15, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >> Looking at the current review backlog I think that we have to
> >> seriously question whether our stable branch review process in
> >> Nova is working to an acc
Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2014-07-31 10:17:16 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote:
>> That's a good idea. We would probably switch to $PROJECT-stable-maint
>> teams then (each including $PROJECT-core and the general stable-maint
>> team) since we don't have a group in Gerrit for *-core anyway.
> [
On 2014-07-31 10:17:16 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote:
> That's a good idea. We would probably switch to $PROJECT-stable-maint
> teams then (each including $PROJECT-core and the general stable-maint
> team) since we don't have a group in Gerrit for *-core anyway.
[...]
I think we can actually
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 30/07/14 19:22, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:01 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>> As a stable-maint, I'm always hesitant to review patches I've no
>> understanding on, hence I end up just checking how big is the
>> patch, whe
Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 07/30/2014 01:22 PM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:
>> Maybe what we need to do is give *-core permission to +2 the patches,
>> but only stable/maint team has *approval* permission. Then, the cores
>> can review the code, and stable/maint only has to verify applicability
>> to
> From: Gary Kotton [mailto:gkot...@vmware.com]>
>
> On 7/30/14, 8:22 PM, "Kevin L. Mitchell"
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:01 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> >> As a stable-maint, I'm always hesitant to review patches I've no
> >> understanding on, hence I end up just checking how big
On 07/30/2014 01:22 PM, Kevin L. Mitchell wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:01 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>> As a stable-maint, I'm always hesitant to review patches I've no
>> understanding on, hence I end up just checking how big is the patch,
>> whether it adds/removes new configuration option
On 7/30/14, 8:22 PM, "Kevin L. Mitchell"
wrote:
>On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:01 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>> As a stable-maint, I'm always hesitant to review patches I've no
>> understanding on, hence I end up just checking how big is the patch,
>> whether it adds/removes new configuration opti
On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:01 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> As a stable-maint, I'm always hesitant to review patches I've no
> understanding on, hence I end up just checking how big is the patch,
> whether it adds/removes new configuration options etc but, the real
> review has to be done by someone
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Russell Bryant wrote:
>> On 07/29/2014 12:12 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> Sure there was some debate about what criteria were desired acceptance
>>> when stable trees were started. Once the criteria are defined I don't
>>> think it is c
On 07/30/2014 02:21 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:16:00AM +0200, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA512
>>
>> On 29/07/14 18:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 08:30:09AM -0700, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 07/29/
Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 07/29/2014 12:12 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> Sure there was some debate about what criteria were desired acceptance
>> when stable trees were started. Once the criteria are defined I don't
>> think it is credible to say that people are incapable of following the
>> r
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:16:00AM +0200, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 29/07/14 18:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 08:30:09AM -0700, Jay Pipes wrote:
> >> On 07/29/2014 06:13 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >>> On Tue,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 29/07/14 18:12, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 08:30:09AM -0700, Jay Pipes wrote:
>> On 07/29/2014 06:13 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Thierry Carrez
>>> wrote:
Ihar Hrachyshk
On 07/29/2014 09:01 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 07/29/2014 12:12 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> Sure there was some debate about what criteria were desired acceptance
>> when stable trees were started. Once the criteria are defined I don't
>> think it is credible to say that people are incapab
On 07/29/2014 12:12 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Sure there was some debate about what criteria were desired acceptance
> when stable trees were started. Once the criteria are defined I don't
> think it is credible to say that people are incapable of following the
> rules. In the unlikely event
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 08:30:09AM -0700, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 07/29/2014 06:13 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> >>Ihar Hrachyshka a écrit :
> >>At the dawn of time there were no OpenStack stable branches, each
> >>distribution was
On 07/29/2014 06:13 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Ihar Hrachyshka a écrit :
At the dawn of time there were no OpenStack stable branches, each
distribution was maintaining its own stable branches, duplicating the
backporting work. At
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> The situation I'm seeing is that the broader community believe that
> the Nova core team is responsible for the nova stable branches. When
> stuff sits in review for ages it is the core team that is getting
> pinged about it and on the receiving end of the complaints the
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 02:04:42PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Ihar Hrachyshka a écrit :
> At the dawn of time there were no OpenStack stable branches, each
> distribution was maintaining its own stable branches, duplicating the
> backporting work. At some point it was suggested (mostly by RedHa
Ihar Hrachyshka a écrit :
> On 29/07/14 12:15, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> Looking at the current review backlog I think that we have to
>> seriously question whether our stable branch review process in
>> Nova is working to an acceptable level
>
>> On Havana
>
>> - 43 patches pending
>> - 1
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 29/07/14 12:15, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> Looking at the current review backlog I think that we have to
> seriously question whether our stable branch review process in
> Nova is working to an acceptable level
>
> On Havana
>
> - 43 patches
24 matches
Mail list logo
