Open Stack

Saverio Proto wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> I am again proposing a change due to operations experience. I am
> proposing a clean and simple cherry-pick to Ocata.
> 
> "it depends" works pretty bad as policy for accepting patches.
> 
> Now I really dont understand what is the issue with the Stable Policy
> and this patch:
> 
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/539439/
> 
> This is a UX problem. Horizon is giving the wrong information to the user.
> 
> I got this answer:
> Ocata is the second phase of stable branches [1]. Only critical bugfixes
> and security patches are acceptable. I don't think it belongs to the
> category.

Every deployer has different expectations for "stable", which is why we
have a stable branch policy. Our current policy is a trade-off between
being a source of important fixes ("bugfix" branch), and changing less
and less as time moves on ("stable" branch). The idea behind it being,
if people lived with a minor issue for so long, the behavior change
creates more "instability" than keeping the minor bug in.

The rules have been followed in this case -- it's a UI bug, but changing
the behavior now would create unwanted churn on a "stable" branch for
little gain.

You seem to be interested in a policy shift toward more of a "bugfix"
branch where any fix should be allowed to land, and where branch age
should not be a factor. It would be interesting to assess if that is a
general view. I know that distros in general are happy with more of a
"stable" approach.

> But merging a patch that changes a log file in Nova back to Newton was
> OKAY few weeks ago.
Could you provide a link to that one ?

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)