Open Stack

On 2016-04-19 16:10:12 +0100 (+0100), Chris Dent wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2016, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
[...]
> > I feel like many of the people pushing this idea simply didn't
> > get to experience the pain it causes the first time around and
> > won't believe their peers who lived through it.
> 
> I feel like I have to respond to this, because I'm one pushing this (at
> least in this thread). I'll try not to take umbrage.
[...]

Sorry, no umbrage intended! At least I said "many" and not "all." ;)

> What I would like to see is that not only do packages lag master
> (they already do to some extent) but that requirements
> co-installability resolution also lags master. At master we should
> be building the future; yes, with chaos. That chaos should be
> resolved in a stabilizing process, driven by those with a need for
> stability.
[...]

Yep, I understand the sentiment. Just remember that we _did_ already
have that, and the requirements synchronization in place now grew
out of the pain points from trying to force co-installability as
problems arose rather than getting in front of them. It might not be
as terrible the second time around since we've decoupled and
modularized a lot more of OpenStack in the time since, but I don't
want us to forget why we have the solutions we have and would hate
to see us blow a release by having to hastily put them back into
place again after thinking we could just wing it.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley