On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 8:29 PM Dmitry Tantsur dtantsur@redhat.com wrote:
On 7/31/19 8:21 PM, Kendall Nelson wrote:
Hello Everyone!
Development Focus
We are now past the Train-2 milestone, and entering the last development phase of the cycle. Teams should be focused on implementing planned work for the cycle.Now is a good time to review those plans and reprioritize anything if needed based on the what progress has been made and what looks realistic to complete in the next few weeks.
General Information
The following cycle-with-intermediary deliverables have not done any intermediary release yet during this cycle. The cycle-with-rc release model is more suited for deliverables that plan to be released only once per cycle.
I respectfully disagree. I will reserve my opinion on whether cycle-with-rc suits *anyone*, but in our case I'd prefer to have an option of releasing something in the middle of a cycle even if we don't exercise this option way too often.
I'm not an ironic PTL, bit anyway please note that I'm -1 on the change for any of our projects.
I agree with Dmitry. cycle-with-intermediary model allows project teams to release somethings at any time during a release when they want. On the other hand, cycle-with-intermediary means at least one release along with a release cycle. "cycle-with-rc" means such deliverable can only *one* release per cycle. "cycle-with-rc" might be a good option for some projects but I think it is not forced.
If some deliverable tends to have less changes and it is not worth cutting a release, another option might be "independent". My understanding is that "independent" release model does not allow us to have stable branches, so it might be a thing considered carefully when we switch some deliverable to "independent".
Talking about horizon plugins, as a neutron release liaison, neutron-fwaas/vpnaas-dashboard hit similar situation to ironic-ui. we don't have any substantial changes till now in this cycle. I guess this situation may continues in further releases in most horizon plugins. I am not sure which release model is appropriate. horizon adopts release-with-rc model now and horizon plugins are usually assumed to work with a specific release of horizon, so "independent" might not fit. release-with-intermediary or release-with-rc may fit, but there are cases where they have only infra related changes in a cycle.
Thanks, Akihiro Motoki
Dmitry
As a result, we will be proposing to change the release model for the following deliverables:
blazar-dashboard
cloudkitty-dashboard ec2-api freezer-web-ui freezer heat-agents heat-dashboard ironic-ui karbor-dashboard karbor kuryr-kubernetes magnum-ui manila-ui masakari-dashboard monasca-agent monasca-api monasca-ceilometer monasca-events-api monasca-kibana-plugin monasca-log-api monasca-notification monasca-persister monasca-thresh monasca-transform monasca-ui murano-agent networking-baremetal networking-generic-switch networking-hyperv neutron-fwaas-dashboard neutron-vpnaas-dashboard requirements sahara-extra senlin-dashboard solum-dashboard tacker-horizon tricircle vitrage-dashboard vitrage watcher-dashboard
PTLs and release liaisons for each of those deliverables can either +1 the release model changewhen we get them pushed, or propose an intermediary release for that deliverable. In absence of answer by the start of R-10 week we'll consider that the switch to cycle-with-rc is preferable.
Upcoming Deadlines & Dates
Non-client library freeze: September 05 (R-6 week) Client library freeze: September 12 (R-5 week) Train-3 milestone: September 12 (R-5 week)
-Kendall (diablo_rojo) + the Release Management Team