Open Stack

Hi,
I replied in the patch, but I also would like to express my opinion in this
thread.

Release names can be problematic as described in this proposal.
https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/governance/+/839897

However, I still think that the release name is important for the
community.
It’s part of the OpenStack culture! Is something that we have since the
release “A” for “Austin”.
I never saw anyone mentioning that they are still running Nova with the
release “2011.3” and need to upgrade.
Instead the community mentions the release name, “Diablo” (for example...)

Having said that, I also believe it’s important to have a clear release
identification schema without
the ambiguity of the alphabet iteration.

In my opinion both should coexist.

Belmiro

On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 8:01 PM Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org> wrote:

> On 5/2/22 18:14, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
> >   ---- On Mon, 02 May 2022 10:49:09 -0500 Thomas Goirand <
> zigo at debian.org> wrote ----
> >   > On 4/29/22 19:35, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
> >   > > [...] from tehnical perspective especially
> >   > > while upgrade they are hard to know which year these releses were
> released.
> >   >
> >   > Excuse my words (I'm being direct, hopefully not offensive), but I'm
> >   > calling "bullshit" on this one! :) Just read this page and you know:
> >
> > Sorry, Thomas but being direct or justifying the disagreement is a
> separate thing from using such
> > words, I do not find these appropriate. My humble request is to avoid
> these, please.
>
> Ok, sorry... :/
>
> > Yes, this page has all information but that is what my point was, you
> need to look into the release
> > page to get those details then just getting that information from
> release name/number.
>
> The same way, you need to remember that 202x.1 is tick, and 202x.2 is
> tock. Oh, or is it the other way around?!? I actually think it is, with
> current plan...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Thomas Goirand (zigo)
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20220503/9c4d1dcf/attachment.htm>