[openstack-dev] [oslo] maintenance policy for code graduating from the incubator

Doug Hellmann doug.hellmann at dreamhost.com
Mon Dec 2 13:46:56 UTC 2013

On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 8:36 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 11/29/2013 01:39 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > We have a review up (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/58297/) to add
> > some features to the notification system in the oslo incubator. THe
> > notification system is being moved into oslo.messaging, and so we have
> > the question of whether to accept the patch to the incubated version,
> > move it to oslo.messaging, or carry it in both.
> >
> > As I say in the review, from a practical standpoint I think we can't
> > really support continued development in both places. Given the number of
> > times the topic of "just make everything a library" has come up, I would
> > prefer that we focus our energy on completing the transition for a given
> > module or library once it the process starts. We also need to avoid
> > feature drift, and provide a clear incentive for projects to update to
> > the new library.
> >
> > Based on that, I would like to say that we do not add new features to
> > incubated code after it starts moving into a library, and only provide
> > "stable-like" bug fix support until integrated projects are moved over
> > to the graduated library (although even that is up for discussion).
> > After all integrated projects that use the code are using the library
> > instead of the incubator, we can delete the module(s) from the incubator.
> >
> > Before we make this policy official, I want to solicit feedback from the
> > rest of the community and the Oslo core team.
> +1 in general.
> You may want to make "after it starts moving into a library" more
> specific, though.

I think my word choice is probably what threw Sandy off, too.

How about "after it has been moved into a library with at least a release
candidate published"?

>  One approach could be to reflect this status in the
> MAINTAINERS file.  Right now there is a status field for each module in
> the incubator:

>  S: Status, one of the following:
>       Maintained:  Has an active maintainer
>       Orphan:      No current maintainer, feel free to step up!
>       Obsolete:    Replaced by newer code, or a dead end, or out-dated
> It seems that the types of code we're talking about should just be
> marked as Obsolete.  Obsolete code should only get stable-like bug fixes.
> That would mean marking 'rpc' and 'notifier' as Obsolete (currently
> listed as Maintained).  I think that is accurate, though.

Good point.


> https://review.openstack.org/59367
> --
> Russell Bryant
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131202/2c7ef28d/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list