[openstack-dev] [TripleO] milestone-proposed branches

James Slagle james.slagle at gmail.com
Fri Jan 17 13:18:01 UTC 2014

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Clint Byrum <clint at fewbar.com> wrote:
> Note that tripleo-incubator is special and should not be released. It
> is intentionally kept unfrozen and unreleased to make sure there is no
> illusion of stability.

I think it would be nice if we could point people at a devtest that
they could use with our other released stuff. Without that, we might
make a change to devtest, such as showing the use of a new heat
parameter in our templates, and if they're trying to follow along with
a released tripleo-heat-templates then they would have a problem.

Without a branch of incubator, there's no story or documentation
around using any of our released stuff.  You could follow along with
devtest to get an idea of how it's supposed to work and indeed it
might even work, but I don't think that's good enough. There is
tooling in incubator that has proved it's usefulness. Take an example
like setup-endpoints, what we're effectively saying without allowing
people to use that is that there is a useful tool that will setup
endpoints for you, but don't use it with our released stuff because
it's not gauranteed to work and instead make these 10'ish calls to
keystone via some other method. Then you'd also end up with a
different but parallel set of instructions for using our released
stuff vs. not.

This is prohibitive to someone who may want to setup a tripleo CI/CD
cloud deploying stable icehouse or from milestone branches. I think
people would just create their own fork of tripleo-incubator and use

> If there are components in it that need releasing, they should be moved
> into relevant projects or forked into their own projects.

I'd be fine with that approach, except that's pretty much everything
in incubator, the scripts, templates, generated docs, etc. Instead of
creating a new forked repo, why don't we just rename tripleo-incubator
to tripleo-deployment and have some stable branches that people could
use with our releases?

I don't feel like that precludes tripleo from having no stability on
the master branch at all.

> Excerpts from Ryan Brady's message of 2014-01-16 07:42:33 -0800:
>> +1 for releases.
>> In the past I requested a tag for tripleo-incubator to make it easier to build a package and test.
>> In my case a common tag would be easier to track than trying to gather all of the commit hashes where
>> the projects are compatible.
>> Ryan
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "James Slagle" <james.slagle at gmail.com>
>> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 10:13:58 AM
>> Subject: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] milestone-proposed branches
>> At last summit, we talked about doing stable branches and releases for
>> the TripleO projects for Icehouse.
>> I'd like to propose doing a milestone-proposed branch[1] and tagged
>> release for icehouse milestones 2 and 3. Sort of as dry run and
>> practice, as I think it could help tease out some things we might not
>> have considered when we do try to do icehouse stable branches.
>> The icehouse milestone 2 date is January 23rd [2]. So, if there is
>> concensus to do this, we probably need to get the branches created
>> soon, and then do any bugfixes in the branches (master too of course)
>> up unitl the 23rd.
>> I think it'd be nice if we had a working devtest to use with the
>> released tarballs.  This raises a couple of points:
>>  - We probably need a way in devtest to let people use a different
>> branch (or tarball) of the stuff that is git cloned.
>> - What about tripleo-incubator itself? We've said in the past we don't
>> want to attempt to stabilize or release that due to it's "incubator
>> nature".  But, if we don't have a stable set of devtest instructions
>> (and accompanying scripts like setup-endpoints, etc), then using an
>> ever changing devtest with the branches/tarballs is not likely to work
>> for very long.
>> And yes, I'm volunteering to do the work to support the above, and the
>> release work :).
>> Thoughts?
>> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/BranchModel
>> [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Icehouse_Release_Schedule
>> --
>> -- James Slagle
>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

-- James Slagle

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list