Open Stack

+1 for Critical + High.

Kevin Benton wrote:
> +1. Anything that lands in the high category is usually something that will
> have a big operational impact.
>
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka<ihrachys at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> as per [1] I imply that all projects under stable-maint-core team
>> supervision must abide the stable policy [2] which limits the types of
>> backports for N-2 branches (now it’s stable/kilo) to "Only critical
>> bugfixes and security patches”. With that, I remind all stable core members
>> about the rule.
>>
>> Since we are limited to ‘critical bugfixes’ only, and since there is no
>> clear definition of what ‘critical’ means, I guess we should define it for
>> ourselves.
>>
>> In Neutron world, we usually use Critical importance for those bugs that
>> break gate. High is used for those bugs that have high impact production
>> wise. With that in mind, I suggest we define ‘critical’ bugfixes as
>> Critical + High in LP. Comments on that?
>>
>> (My understanding is that we can also advocate for the change in the
>> global policy if we think the ‘critical only’ rule should be relaxed, but
>> till then it makes sense to stick to what policy says.)
>>
>> [1]
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-November/078649.html
>> [2] http://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html
>>
>> Ihar
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev