Open Stack

2011/11/9 Nachi Ueno <ueno.nachi at nttdata-agilenet.com>:
> I understand your point. Stop QAing stable/diablo and focus on Essex.

Oh, no no. That's not the point. I'm thrilled to have you work on
QAing Diablo. The only issue is that the fixes you come up with should
be pushed to Essex first. There are two reasons for this:

 * If we don't push the fixes to Essex, the problems will still be
present in Essex and every release after that.

 * Having them in Essex lets us try them out, vet them and validate
them more thoroughly before we let them into the stable branch. When a
patch lands in the stable branch it has to be well tested already
(unless of course Essex has deviated too much, in which case we'll
have to accept the risk of getting it into Diablo directly).

> However the current situation is different. IMO the quality diablo is
> not ready for real deployment.
> In the diablo summit, I think we agreed the policy "Do not decrease
> code coverage on merge".
> But it is not applied through diablo timeframe,and the diablo has
> small coverage.

This is true :(

> We are struggling with very tight schedule. X(
> If our contribution is rejected to the stable/diablo, to maintain our
> own branch is only option for us.
> And I don't really want to do this.

Yes, I would very much like to avoid this as well.

-- 
Soren Hansen        | http://linux2go.dk/
Ubuntu Developer    | http://www.ubuntu.com/
OpenStack Developer | http://www.openstack.org/