[openstack-dev] [tc][kolla] Change to kolla's release model to gain access to release's website marketing

Doug Hellmann doug at doughellmann.com
Sat Apr 2 20:06:09 UTC 2016

> On Apr 2, 2016, at 1:01 PM, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
> On 2016-04-02 16:13:28 +0000 (+0000), Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:
> [...]
>> I feel as though we are not permitted to participate in the
>> marketing that takes place on the releases website
> [...]
> I'll refrain from commenting on the rest since I'm not a member of
> the release team, but I *seriously* hope we've not created a
> "marketing" portal simply by way of tracking version numbers,
> changelogs and release schedules. I have a feeling few (if any) of
> the release team wants to get into the marketing business and I'm
> happy to help do whatever is in my power to neuter the "marketing
> potential" for releases.openstack.org so it can be viewed simply as
> a source of _objective_ technical data.

That’s the idea, though there will be some inevitable marketing side-effects.

We have been trying to be strict with having projects declare their release tags early in the cycle [1] so that we can point to the releases site as clearly communicating a team’s intent so that users know what to expect. This was the first cycle where there were any real ramifications to choosing the “wrong” release model, and we’ve had discussions with a few teams throughout the cycle and more recently I proposed a warning to the documentation for the independent model tag specifically about that [2].

The situation is similar to the projects we’ve had that didn’t actually build a release artifact. Since we can’t point to a release, it’s not clear to end users that they *did* release.

Anyway, this is all relatively new, so we expected some issues. We’re dealing with them on a case-by-case basis, trying to be flexible but at the same time trying to ensure we’re not watering down any of the declarations and all with the understanding that if a team is unhappy with the outcome for Mitaka it can be fixed for Newton (hint: teams that want to change their release model for Newton should submit the governance patch to do that now).


[1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-January/083726.html
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/299309/

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list