[openstack-dev] [all] Switching to longer development cycles
mriedemos at gmail.com
Wed Dec 13 17:34:49 UTC 2017
On 12/13/2017 11:16 AM, Jean-Philippe Evrard wrote:
>> On the other hand, without community-wide imposed deadlines and milestones,
>> we lose some motivation for getting things done by a specific time, which
>> could mean the bigger and more complicated things drag on longer because
>> there isn't a deadline. One could say that we just need to be more
>> disciplined, but in an open source project where there is no boss at the top
>> setting that deadline and holding people to it, it's hard to be that
>> disciplined. The PTL can only ask people to work on priorities so much.
> We could still have community-wide milestones and deadlines.
> I don't understand the point of "no boss at the top", I don't see how
> it impacts.
> You're right on the idea, but I don't see how the cycle length changes that.
> Do you think milestones have less value/criticality than final release?
Yes, I definitely think the milestones have very little value except as
checkpoints within a release. I think of them like targets in the
schedule, e.g. the 2nd milestone is when the hairiest of changes should
be done so we have the 3rd milestone to flush out any major bugs before
the release. But the tags themselves have no real value. Nova considers
each commit a release that is in production that day and supports
continuous deployment from master so the commit that we tag for the
milestone is completely arbitrary.
>> I personally don't expect anyone to pick up these intermediate releases. I
>> expect most consumers are going to pick up a coordinated release (several
>> months or years after it's released), especially if that's what the distro
>> vendors are going to be doing. So Nova could release once per quarter but I
>> wouldn't expect anyone to pick it up except maybe hosting companies, but not
>> even sure about that.
> Our deployment project could/would rely more on upstream intermediate release,
> so all our consumers would get that at the same time.
If you're comfortable with intermediate releases, what's stopping you
from just doing continuous delivery from master with some pre-production
staging testing downstream before you release to your customers?
> If we are properly gating the upgrades at anytime during the cycle, I'd not
> see why we wouldn't consume an intermediate relase and support upgrade
> from previous branch.
Same question as above about just doing CD then.
More information about the OpenStack-dev