>
> Yup I think 6 months makes sense. I'll work up a change to the releases repo
> to record the target date for switching between Phases and EOL dates.
>
> There will be a little duplication of data but I think we can live with that.
>
> Yours Tony.
Perfect - thanks Tony and Jeremy! Exactly
On 2/7/2017 11:52 AM, Jay S Bryant wrote:
This would also mean we would need to be
careful to ensure that any backports to Newton also make it into Ocata
to avoid holes in fix coverage.>
You have to do this regardless. Just saying.
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 06:26:57PM -0600, Jay S Bryant wrote:
>
>
> On 2/9/2017 6:09 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:41:26PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> > > On 2017-02-09 11:24:46 -0600 (-0600), Sean McGinnis wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > Thanks both. The original
On 2/9/2017 6:09 PM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:41:26PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
On 2017-02-09 11:24:46 -0600 (-0600), Sean McGinnis wrote:
[...]
Thanks both. The original question still stands though. Are we rolling
over support phases at the 6 month boundary as
On 2017-02-09 18:09:39 -0600 (-0600), Sean McGinnis wrote:
[...]
> Thanks Jeremy. Something must be getting lost in translation with my question
> though. :)
>
> I am just going to assume that the support phases are in fact 6 months, so
> Newton will still be a fully active stable branch for a
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:41:26PM +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2017-02-09 11:24:46 -0600 (-0600), Sean McGinnis wrote:
> [...]
> > Thanks both. The original question still stands though. Are we rolling
> > over support phases at the 6 month boundary as stated, or is the intent
> > actually
On 2017-02-09 11:24:46 -0600 (-0600), Sean McGinnis wrote:
[...]
> Thanks both. The original question still stands though. Are we rolling
> over support phases at the 6 month boundary as stated, or is the intent
> actually to be on the release boundaries?
Note this was also discussed here a
On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 05:10:00PM +0800, ChangBo Guo wrote:
> Just copy statement from
> http://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#support-phases
>
> "*The exact length of any given stable branch life support is discussed
> amongst stable branch maintainers and
Just copy statement from
http://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#support-phases
"*The exact length of any given stable branch life support is discussed
amongst stable branch maintainers and QA/infrastructure teams at every
Design Summit*. It is generally between 9 and 15
On 2017-02-07 18:52, Jay S Bryant wrote:
>
> On 2/7/2017 11:41 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
>> Just looking for clarification on our support phase timing now with the
>> shorter release cycle for Ocata.
>>
>> According to our published support phase schedule [1], each phase is in
>> 6 month
On 2/7/2017 11:41 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
Just looking for clarification on our support phase timing now with the
shorter release cycle for Ocata.
According to our published support phase schedule [1], each phase is in
6 month increments from the release date.
In the past, this had lined up
11 matches
Mail list logo
