On 18/11/19 5:35 pm, Ben Nemec wrote:
On 11/18/19 4:08 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 11/18/2019 3:40 PM, Mohammed Naser wrote:
The proposal that I had was that in mind would be for us to let teams self manage their own stable branches. I think we've reached a point where we can trust most of our community to be familiar with the stable branch policy (and let teams decide for themselves what they believe is best for the success of their own projects).
So for a project like nova that has a separate nova-core [1] and nova-stable-maint team [2] where some from [2] aren't in [1], what does this mean? Drop [2] and just rely on [1]? That won't work for those in nova-core that aren't familiar enough with the stable branch guidelines or simply don't care to review stable branch changes, and won't work for those that are in nova-stable-maint but not nova-core.
I believe the proposal is to allow the Nova team to manage nova-stable-maint in the same way they do nova-core, not to force anyone to drop their stable-maint team entirely.
I think the proposal was actually for each *-stable-maint team to manage itself. This would avoid the situation where e.g. the TC appoints a brand-new PTL and suddenly they get to make themselves a stable core, as in that case the team would still have to be bootstrapped by the stable-maint team. But it would allow those who are both closest to the project and confirmed to be familiar with the stable guidelines to make decisions about who else is ready to join that group. - ZB
[1] https://review.opendev.org/#/admin/groups/25,members [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/admin/groups/540,members