[TripleO] moving stable/rocky for tripleo repos to unmaintained (+ then EOL) OK?
Hello TripleO I would like to propose that we move all tripleo stable/rocky repos [1] to "unmaintained", with a view to tagging as end-of-life in due course. This will allow us to focus our efforts on keeping the check and gate queues green and continue to deliver weekly promotions for the more recent and active stable/* branches train ussuri victoria and master. The stable/rocky repos have not had much action in the last few months - I collected some info at [2] about the most recent stable/rocky commits for each of the tripleo repos. For many of those there are no commits in the last 6 months and for some even longer. The tripleo stable/rocky repos were tagged as "extended maintenance" (rocky-em) [2] in April 2020 with [3]. We have already reduced our CI commitment for rocky - these [4] are the current check/gate jobs and these [5] are the jobs that run for promotion to current-tripleo. However maintaining this doesn’t make sense if we are not even using it e.g. merging things into tripleo-* stable/rocky. Please raise your objections or any other comments or thoughts about this. Unless there are any blockers raised here, the plan is to put this into motion early in January. One still unanswered question I have is that since there is no ‘unmaintained’ tag, in the same way as we have the <release>-em or <release-eol> for extended maintenance and end-of-life, do we simply _declare_ that the repos are unmaintained? Then after a period of “0 to 6 months” per [6] we can tag the tripleo repos with rocky-eol. If any one reading this knows please tell us! Thanks for reading! regards, marios [1] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#rocky [2] http://paste.openstack.org/raw/800464/ [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/709912 [4] http://dashboard-ci.tripleo.org/d/3-DYSmOGk/jobs-exploration?orgId=1&var-influxdb_filter=branch%7C%3D%7Cstable%2Frocky [5] http://dashboard-ci.tripleo.org/d/3-DYSmOGk/jobs-exploration?orgId=1&fullscreen&panelId=9&var-influxdb_filter=type%7C%3D%7Crdo&var-influxdb_filter=job_name%7C%3D~%7C%2Fperiodic.*-rocky%2F [6] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintenan...
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:01 PM Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello TripleO
I would like to propose that we move all tripleo stable/rocky repos [1] to "unmaintained", with a view to tagging as end-of-life in due course.
This will allow us to focus our efforts on keeping the check and gate queues green and continue to deliver weekly promotions for the more recent and active stable/* branches train ussuri victoria and master.
The stable/rocky repos have not had much action in the last few months - I collected some info at [2] about the most recent stable/rocky commits for each of the tripleo repos. For many of those there are no commits in the last 6 months and for some even longer.
The tripleo stable/rocky repos were tagged as "extended maintenance" (rocky-em) [2] in April 2020 with [3].
We have already reduced our CI commitment for rocky - these [4] are the current check/gate jobs and these [5] are the jobs that run for promotion to current-tripleo. However maintaining this doesn’t make sense if we are not even using it e.g. merging things into tripleo-* stable/rocky.
Please raise your objections or any other comments or thoughts about this. Unless there are any blockers raised here, the plan is to put this into motion early in January.
One still unanswered question I have is that since there is no ‘unmaintained’ tag, in the same way as we have the <release>-em or <release-eol> for extended maintenance and end-of-life, do we simply _declare_ that the repos are unmaintained? Then after a period of “0 to 6 months” per [6] we can tag the tripleo repos with rocky-eol. If any one reading this knows please tell us!
o/ hello ! replying to bump the thread - this was sent ~1 month ago now and there hasn't been any comment thus far. ping @Herve please do you know the answer to that question in the last paragraph above about 'declaring unmaintained' ? please thank you ;) As discussed at the last tripleo bi-weekly we can consider moving forward with this so I think it's prudent to give folks more chance to comment if they object for _reason_ thanks, marios
Thanks for reading!
regards, marios
[1] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#rocky
[2] http://paste.openstack.org/raw/800464/
[3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/709912
[6] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintenan...
Hello, Sorry for my late reply, and thanks for the heads up. Can't we move directly to EOL [1]? I don't see reason to keep an unmaintained repo open, and if the repos remain open and patches merged then it's not really unmaintained repos. The goal of the extended maintenance was to offer more chances to downstream maintainers to get/share patches and fixes, if you decide to not maintain them anymore then I would suggest you to move to "EOL" directly, it would be less misleading. Notice that if you move rocky to eol all the corresponding branches will be dropped in your repos. Also notice that last week we proposed a new kind of tag (<series>-last) [2][3] for Tempest's needs, but because tempest is branchless... Maybe we could extend this notion (-last) to allow the project to reflect the last step... It could reflect that it will be your last release, and that the project is near from the end. But if you don't plan to merge patches, or if you don't have patches to merge anymore, then I would really suggest to you to move directly to EOL, else it means that you're not really "unmaintained". Hopefully it will help you to find the solution that fits your needs. Let me know if you have more questions. [1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20180301-stable-branch-eol.h... [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/770265 [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/769821 Le ven. 15 janv. 2021 à 16:52, Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com> a écrit :
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:01 PM Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello TripleO
I would like to propose that we move all tripleo stable/rocky repos [1] to "unmaintained", with a view to tagging as end-of-life in due course.
This will allow us to focus our efforts on keeping the check and gate queues green and continue to deliver weekly promotions for the more recent and active stable/* branches train ussuri victoria and master.
The stable/rocky repos have not had much action in the last few months - I collected some info at [2] about the most recent stable/rocky commits for each of the tripleo repos. For many of those there are no commits in the last 6 months and for some even longer.
The tripleo stable/rocky repos were tagged as "extended maintenance" (rocky-em) [2] in April 2020 with [3].
We have already reduced our CI commitment for rocky - these [4] are the current check/gate jobs and these [5] are the jobs that run for promotion to current-tripleo. However maintaining this doesn’t make sense if we are not even using it e.g. merging things into tripleo-* stable/rocky.
Please raise your objections or any other comments or thoughts about this. Unless there are any blockers raised here, the plan is to put this into motion early in January.
One still unanswered question I have is that since there is no ‘unmaintained’ tag, in the same way as we have the <release>-em or <release-eol> for extended maintenance and end-of-life, do we simply _declare_ that the repos are unmaintained? Then after a period of “0 to 6 months” per [6] we can tag the tripleo repos with rocky-eol. If any one reading this knows please tell us!
o/ hello !
replying to bump the thread - this was sent ~1 month ago now and there hasn't been any comment thus far.
ping @Herve please do you know the answer to that question in the last paragraph above about 'declaring unmaintained' ? please thank you ;)
As discussed at the last tripleo bi-weekly we can consider moving forward with this so I think it's prudent to give folks more chance to comment if they object for _reason_
thanks, marios
Thanks for reading!
regards, marios
[1] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#rocky
[2] http://paste.openstack.org/raw/800464/
[3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/709912
[6] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintenan...
-- Hervé Beraud Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat irc: hberaud https://github.com/4383/ https://twitter.com/4383hberaud -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wsFcBAABCAAQBQJb4AwCCRAHwXRBNkGNegAALSkQAHrotwCiL3VMwDR0vcja10Q+ Kf31yCutl5bAlS7tOKpPQ9XN4oC0ZSThyNNFVrg8ail0SczHXsC4rOrsPblgGRN+ RQLoCm2eO1AkB0ubCYLaq0XqSaO+Uk81QxAPkyPCEGT6SRxXr2lhADK0T86kBnMP F8RvGolu3EFjlqCVgeOZaR51PqwUlEhZXZuuNKrWZXg/oRiY4811GmnvzmUhgK5G 5+f8mUg74hfjDbR2VhjTeaLKp0PhskjOIKY3vqHXofLuaqFDD+WrAy/NgDGvN22g glGfj472T3xyHnUzM8ILgAGSghfzZF5Skj2qEeci9cB6K3Hm3osj+PbvfsXE/7Kw m/xtm+FjnaywZEv54uCmVIzQsRIm1qJscu20Qw6Q0UiPpDFqD7O6tWSRKdX11UTZ hwVQTMh9AKQDBEh2W9nnFi9kzSSNu4OQ1dRMcYHWfd9BEkccezxHwUM4Xyov5Fe0 qnbfzTB1tYkjU78loMWFaLa00ftSxP/DtQ//iYVyfVNfcCwfDszXLOqlkvGmY1/Y F1ON0ONekDZkGJsDoS6QdiUSn8RZ2mHArGEWMV00EV5DCIbCXRvywXV43ckx8Z+3 B8qUJhBqJ8RS2F+vTs3DTaXqcktgJ4UkhYC2c1gImcPRyGrK9VY0sCT+1iA+wp/O v6rDpkeNksZ9fFSyoY2o =ECSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 7:01 PM Herve Beraud <hberaud@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello,
Sorry for my late reply, and thanks for the heads up.
Can't we move directly to EOL [1]? I don't see reason to keep an unmaintained repo open, and if the repos remain open and patches merged then it's not really unmaintained repos.
The goal of the extended maintenance was to offer more chances to downstream maintainers to get/share patches and fixes, if you decide to not maintain them anymore then I would suggest you to move to "EOL" directly, it would be less misleading.
Notice that if you move rocky to eol all the corresponding branches will be dropped in your repos.
Also notice that last week we proposed a new kind of tag (<series>-last) [2][3] for Tempest's needs, but because tempest is branchless...
Maybe we could extend this notion (-last) to allow the project to reflect the last step... It could reflect that it will be your last release, and that the project is near from the end.
But if you don't plan to merge patches, or if you don't have patches to merge anymore, then I would really suggest to you to move directly to EOL, else it means that you're not really "unmaintained".
OK thanks very much Herve as always for your time and thoughts here. I am not against the EOL I just thought it was more of a requirement to declare it 'unmaintained' first. The advantage is it is a softer path to completely closing it off for any future submissions. Possibly the '-last' tag fits this need but if I have understood correctly it might need some adjustment to the definition of that tag ('we could extend this notion') and honestly I don't know if it is necessary. More likely straight to EOL is what we want here. I will bring this up again in tomorrow's tripleo irc meeting http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-January/019859.h... and point to this thread. Let's see what other opinions there are around EOL vs -last for stable/rocky thank you, marios
Hopefully it will help you to find the solution that fits your needs.
Let me know if you have more questions.
[1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20180301-stable-branch-eol.h... [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/770265 [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/769821
Le ven. 15 janv. 2021 à 16:52, Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com> a écrit :
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:01 PM Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello TripleO
I would like to propose that we move all tripleo stable/rocky repos [1] to "unmaintained", with a view to tagging as end-of-life in due course.
This will allow us to focus our efforts on keeping the check and gate queues green and continue to deliver weekly promotions for the more recent and active stable/* branches train ussuri victoria and master.
The stable/rocky repos have not had much action in the last few months - I collected some info at [2] about the most recent stable/rocky commits for each of the tripleo repos. For many of those there are no commits in the last 6 months and for some even longer.
The tripleo stable/rocky repos were tagged as "extended maintenance" (rocky-em) [2] in April 2020 with [3].
We have already reduced our CI commitment for rocky - these [4] are the current check/gate jobs and these [5] are the jobs that run for promotion to current-tripleo. However maintaining this doesn’t make sense if we are not even using it e.g. merging things into tripleo-* stable/rocky.
Please raise your objections or any other comments or thoughts about this. Unless there are any blockers raised here, the plan is to put this into motion early in January.
One still unanswered question I have is that since there is no ‘unmaintained’ tag, in the same way as we have the <release>-em or <release-eol> for extended maintenance and end-of-life, do we simply _declare_ that the repos are unmaintained? Then after a period of “0 to 6 months” per [6] we can tag the tripleo repos with rocky-eol. If any one reading this knows please tell us!
o/ hello !
replying to bump the thread - this was sent ~1 month ago now and there hasn't been any comment thus far.
ping @Herve please do you know the answer to that question in the last paragraph above about 'declaring unmaintained' ? please thank you ;)
As discussed at the last tripleo bi-weekly we can consider moving forward with this so I think it's prudent to give folks more chance to comment if they object for _reason_
thanks, marios
Thanks for reading!
regards, marios
[1] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#rocky
[2] http://paste.openstack.org/raw/800464/
[3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/709912
[6] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintenan...
-- Hervé Beraud Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat irc: hberaud https://github.com/4383/ https://twitter.com/4383hberaud -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
wsFcBAABCAAQBQJb4AwCCRAHwXRBNkGNegAALSkQAHrotwCiL3VMwDR0vcja10Q+ Kf31yCutl5bAlS7tOKpPQ9XN4oC0ZSThyNNFVrg8ail0SczHXsC4rOrsPblgGRN+ RQLoCm2eO1AkB0ubCYLaq0XqSaO+Uk81QxAPkyPCEGT6SRxXr2lhADK0T86kBnMP F8RvGolu3EFjlqCVgeOZaR51PqwUlEhZXZuuNKrWZXg/oRiY4811GmnvzmUhgK5G 5+f8mUg74hfjDbR2VhjTeaLKp0PhskjOIKY3vqHXofLuaqFDD+WrAy/NgDGvN22g glGfj472T3xyHnUzM8ILgAGSghfzZF5Skj2qEeci9cB6K3Hm3osj+PbvfsXE/7Kw m/xtm+FjnaywZEv54uCmVIzQsRIm1qJscu20Qw6Q0UiPpDFqD7O6tWSRKdX11UTZ hwVQTMh9AKQDBEh2W9nnFi9kzSSNu4OQ1dRMcYHWfd9BEkccezxHwUM4Xyov5Fe0 qnbfzTB1tYkjU78loMWFaLa00ftSxP/DtQ//iYVyfVNfcCwfDszXLOqlkvGmY1/Y F1ON0ONekDZkGJsDoS6QdiUSn8RZ2mHArGEWMV00EV5DCIbCXRvywXV43ckx8Z+3 B8qUJhBqJ8RS2F+vTs3DTaXqcktgJ4UkhYC2c1gImcPRyGrK9VY0sCT+1iA+wp/O v6rDpkeNksZ9fFSyoY2o =ECSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hello Le lun. 18 janv. 2021 à 10:22, Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com> a écrit :
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 7:01 PM Herve Beraud <hberaud@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello,
Sorry for my late reply, and thanks for the heads up.
Can't we move directly to EOL [1]? I don't see reason to keep an unmaintained repo open, and if the repos remain open and patches merged then it's not really unmaintained repos.
The goal of the extended maintenance was to offer more chances to downstream maintainers to get/share patches and fixes, if you decide to not maintain them anymore then I would suggest you to move to "EOL" directly, it would be less misleading.
Notice that if you move rocky to eol all the corresponding branches will be dropped in your repos.
Also notice that last week we proposed a new kind of tag (<series>-last) [2][3] for Tempest's needs, but because tempest is branchless...
Maybe we could extend this notion (-last) to allow the project to reflect the last step... It could reflect that it will be your last release, and that the project is near from the end.
But if you don't plan to merge patches, or if you don't have patches to merge anymore, then I would really suggest to you to move directly to EOL, else it means that you're not really "unmaintained".
OK thanks very much Herve as always for your time and thoughts here. I am not against the EOL I just thought it was more of a requirement to declare it 'unmaintained' first. The advantage is it is a softer path to completely closing it off for any future submissions. Possibly the '-last' tag fits this need but if I have understood correctly it might need some adjustment to the definition of that tag ('we could extend this notion') and honestly I don't know if it is necessary. More likely straight to EOL is what we want here.
You're welcome, Do not hesitate to ping us. Concerning the "-last", I said that we surely need to extend this kind of tag because it is referenced for tempest's usages. I think EOL fits our needs and is the shortest path.
I will bring this up again in tomorrow's tripleo irc meeting http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-January/019859.h... and point to this thread. Let's see what other opinions there are around EOL vs -last for stable/rocky
Same thing on my side, I added this topic to our next relmgt irc meeting (thursday) to see opinions of the team.
thank you, marios
Thank you
Hopefully it will help you to find the solution that fits your needs.
Let me know if you have more questions.
[1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20180301-stable-branch-eol.h... [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/770265 [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/769821
Le ven. 15 janv. 2021 à 16:52, Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com> a écrit :
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:01 PM Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com> wrote:
Hello TripleO
I would like to propose that we move all tripleo stable/rocky repos [1] to "unmaintained", with a view to tagging as end-of-life in due course.
This will allow us to focus our efforts on keeping the check and gate queues green and continue to deliver weekly promotions for the more recent and active stable/* branches train ussuri victoria and master.
The stable/rocky repos have not had much action in the last few months - I collected some info at [2] about the most recent stable/rocky commits for each of the tripleo repos. For many of those there are no commits in the last 6 months and for some even longer.
The tripleo stable/rocky repos were tagged as "extended maintenance" (rocky-em) [2] in April 2020 with [3].
We have already reduced our CI commitment for rocky - these [4] are the current check/gate jobs and these [5] are the jobs that run for promotion to current-tripleo. However maintaining this doesn’t make sense if we are not even using it e.g. merging things into tripleo-* stable/rocky.
Please raise your objections or any other comments or thoughts about this. Unless there are any blockers raised here, the plan is to put this into motion early in January.
One still unanswered question I have is that since there is no ‘unmaintained’ tag, in the same way as we have the <release>-em or <release-eol> for extended maintenance and end-of-life, do we simply _declare_ that the repos are unmaintained? Then after a period of “0 to 6 months” per [6] we can tag the tripleo repos with rocky-eol. If any one reading this knows please tell us!
o/ hello !
replying to bump the thread - this was sent ~1 month ago now and there hasn't been any comment thus far.
ping @Herve please do you know the answer to that question in the last paragraph above about 'declaring unmaintained' ? please thank you ;)
As discussed at the last tripleo bi-weekly we can consider moving forward with this so I think it's prudent to give folks more chance to comment if they object for _reason_
thanks, marios
Thanks for reading!
regards, marios
[1] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#rocky
[2] http://paste.openstack.org/raw/800464/
[3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/709912
[6] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintenan...
-- Hervé Beraud Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat irc: hberaud https://github.com/4383/ https://twitter.com/4383hberaud -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
wsFcBAABCAAQBQJb4AwCCRAHwXRBNkGNegAALSkQAHrotwCiL3VMwDR0vcja10Q+ Kf31yCutl5bAlS7tOKpPQ9XN4oC0ZSThyNNFVrg8ail0SczHXsC4rOrsPblgGRN+ RQLoCm2eO1AkB0ubCYLaq0XqSaO+Uk81QxAPkyPCEGT6SRxXr2lhADK0T86kBnMP F8RvGolu3EFjlqCVgeOZaR51PqwUlEhZXZuuNKrWZXg/oRiY4811GmnvzmUhgK5G 5+f8mUg74hfjDbR2VhjTeaLKp0PhskjOIKY3vqHXofLuaqFDD+WrAy/NgDGvN22g glGfj472T3xyHnUzM8ILgAGSghfzZF5Skj2qEeci9cB6K3Hm3osj+PbvfsXE/7Kw m/xtm+FjnaywZEv54uCmVIzQsRIm1qJscu20Qw6Q0UiPpDFqD7O6tWSRKdX11UTZ hwVQTMh9AKQDBEh2W9nnFi9kzSSNu4OQ1dRMcYHWfd9BEkccezxHwUM4Xyov5Fe0 qnbfzTB1tYkjU78loMWFaLa00ftSxP/DtQ//iYVyfVNfcCwfDszXLOqlkvGmY1/Y F1ON0ONekDZkGJsDoS6QdiUSn8RZ2mHArGEWMV00EV5DCIbCXRvywXV43ckx8Z+3 B8qUJhBqJ8RS2F+vTs3DTaXqcktgJ4UkhYC2c1gImcPRyGrK9VY0sCT+1iA+wp/O v6rDpkeNksZ9fFSyoY2o =ECSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- Hervé Beraud Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat irc: hberaud https://github.com/4383/ https://twitter.com/4383hberaud -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- wsFcBAABCAAQBQJb4AwCCRAHwXRBNkGNegAALSkQAHrotwCiL3VMwDR0vcja10Q+ Kf31yCutl5bAlS7tOKpPQ9XN4oC0ZSThyNNFVrg8ail0SczHXsC4rOrsPblgGRN+ RQLoCm2eO1AkB0ubCYLaq0XqSaO+Uk81QxAPkyPCEGT6SRxXr2lhADK0T86kBnMP F8RvGolu3EFjlqCVgeOZaR51PqwUlEhZXZuuNKrWZXg/oRiY4811GmnvzmUhgK5G 5+f8mUg74hfjDbR2VhjTeaLKp0PhskjOIKY3vqHXofLuaqFDD+WrAy/NgDGvN22g glGfj472T3xyHnUzM8ILgAGSghfzZF5Skj2qEeci9cB6K3Hm3osj+PbvfsXE/7Kw m/xtm+FjnaywZEv54uCmVIzQsRIm1qJscu20Qw6Q0UiPpDFqD7O6tWSRKdX11UTZ hwVQTMh9AKQDBEh2W9nnFi9kzSSNu4OQ1dRMcYHWfd9BEkccezxHwUM4Xyov5Fe0 qnbfzTB1tYkjU78loMWFaLa00ftSxP/DtQ//iYVyfVNfcCwfDszXLOqlkvGmY1/Y F1ON0ONekDZkGJsDoS6QdiUSn8RZ2mHArGEWMV00EV5DCIbCXRvywXV43ckx8Z+3 B8qUJhBqJ8RS2F+vTs3DTaXqcktgJ4UkhYC2c1gImcPRyGrK9VY0sCT+1iA+wp/O v6rDpkeNksZ9fFSyoY2o =ECSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi, just to add some clarification: - 'Unmaintained' is rather a state, where a stable/branch is not maintained (meaning, no one pushes CI fixes, bugfix backports), you don't need to transition to 'unmaintained' - a team can decide whether they want to wait for the 6 months to move the branch to EOL, or (if no one steps up as maintainer) start the EOL process [1] after the warning is sent to the mailing list - the '-last' tag is really created to support tempest's special case, so in TripleO's case EOL is the right choice I hope this helps. And sorry for the late response. Thanks, Előd [1] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#end-of-li... On 2021. 01. 18. 11:44, Herve Beraud wrote:
Hello
Le lun. 18 janv. 2021 à 10:22, Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com <mailto:marios@redhat.com>> a écrit :
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 7:01 PM Herve Beraud <hberaud@redhat.com <mailto:hberaud@redhat.com>> wrote:
Hello,
Sorry for my late reply, and thanks for the heads up.
Can't we move directly to EOL [1]? I don't see reason to keep an unmaintained repo open, and if the repos remain open and patches merged then it's not really unmaintained repos.
The goal of the extended maintenance was to offer more chances to downstream maintainers to get/share patches and fixes, if you decide to not maintain them anymore then I would suggest you to move to "EOL" directly, it would be less misleading.
Notice that if you move rocky to eol all the corresponding branches will be dropped in your repos.
Also notice that last week we proposed a new kind of tag (<series>-last) [2][3] for Tempest's needs, but because tempest is branchless...
Maybe we could extend this notion (-last) to allow the project to reflect the last step... It could reflect that it will be your last release, and that the project is near from the end.
But if you don't plan to merge patches, or if you don't have patches to merge anymore, then I would really suggest to you to move directly to EOL, else it means that you're not really "unmaintained".
OK thanks very much Herve as always for your time and thoughts here. I am not against the EOL I just thought it was more of a requirement to declare it 'unmaintained' first. The advantage is it is a softer path to completely closing it off for any future submissions. Possibly the '-last' tag fits this need but if I have understood correctly it might need some adjustment to the definition of that tag ('we could extend this notion') and honestly I don't know if it is necessary. More likely straight to EOL is what we want here.
You're welcome, Do not hesitate to ping us. Concerning the "-last", I said that we surely need to extend this kind of tag because it is referenced for tempest's usages. I think EOL fits our needs and is the shortest path.
I will bring this up again in tomorrow's tripleo irc meeting http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2021-January/019859.h... and point to this thread. Let's see what other opinions there are around EOL vs -last for stable/rocky
Same thing on my side, I added this topic to our next relmgt irc meeting (thursday) to see opinions of the team.
thank you, marios
Thank you
Hopefully it will help you to find the solution that fits your needs.
Let me know if you have more questions.
[1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20180301-stable-branch-eol.h... [2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/770265 [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/769821
Le ven. 15 janv. 2021 à 16:52, Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com <mailto:marios@redhat.com>> a écrit :
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:01 PM Marios Andreou <marios@redhat.com <mailto:marios@redhat.com>> wrote:
Hello TripleO
I would like to propose that we move all tripleo stable/rocky repos [1] to "unmaintained", with a view to tagging as end-of-life in due course.
This will allow us to focus our efforts on keeping the check and gate queues green and continue to deliver weekly promotions for the more recent and active stable/* branches train ussuri victoria and master.
The stable/rocky repos have not had much action in the last few months - I collected some info at [2] about the most recent stable/rocky commits for each of the tripleo repos. For many of those there are no commits in the last 6 months and for some even longer.
The tripleo stable/rocky repos were tagged as "extended maintenance" (rocky-em) [2] in April 2020 with [3].
We have already reduced our CI commitment for rocky - these [4] are the current check/gate jobs and these [5] are the jobs that run for promotion to current-tripleo. However maintaining this doesn’t make sense if we are not even using it e.g. merging things into tripleo-* stable/rocky.
Please raise your objections or any other comments or thoughts about this. Unless there are any blockers raised here, the plan is to put this into motion early in January.
One still unanswered question I have is that since there is no ‘unmaintained’ tag, in the same way as we have the <release>-em or <release-eol> for extended maintenance and end-of-life, do we simply _declare_ that the repos are unmaintained? Then after a period of “0 to 6 months” per [6] we can tag the tripleo repos with rocky-eol. If any one reading this knows please tell us!
o/ hello !
replying to bump the thread - this was sent ~1 month ago now and there hasn't been any comment thus far.
ping @Herve please do you know the answer to that question in the last paragraph above about 'declaring unmaintained' ? please thank you ;)
As discussed at the last tripleo bi-weekly we can consider moving forward with this so I think it's prudent to give folks more chance to comment if they object for _reason_
thanks, marios
Thanks for reading!
regards, marios
[1] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#rocky
[2] http://paste.openstack.org/raw/800464/
[3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/709912
[6] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintenan...
-- Hervé Beraud Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat irc: hberaud https://github.com/4383/ https://twitter.com/4383hberaud -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
wsFcBAABCAAQBQJb4AwCCRAHwXRBNkGNegAALSkQAHrotwCiL3VMwDR0vcja10Q+ Kf31yCutl5bAlS7tOKpPQ9XN4oC0ZSThyNNFVrg8ail0SczHXsC4rOrsPblgGRN+ RQLoCm2eO1AkB0ubCYLaq0XqSaO+Uk81QxAPkyPCEGT6SRxXr2lhADK0T86kBnMP F8RvGolu3EFjlqCVgeOZaR51PqwUlEhZXZuuNKrWZXg/oRiY4811GmnvzmUhgK5G 5+f8mUg74hfjDbR2VhjTeaLKp0PhskjOIKY3vqHXofLuaqFDD+WrAy/NgDGvN22g glGfj472T3xyHnUzM8ILgAGSghfzZF5Skj2qEeci9cB6K3Hm3osj+PbvfsXE/7Kw m/xtm+FjnaywZEv54uCmVIzQsRIm1qJscu20Qw6Q0UiPpDFqD7O6tWSRKdX11UTZ hwVQTMh9AKQDBEh2W9nnFi9kzSSNu4OQ1dRMcYHWfd9BEkccezxHwUM4Xyov5Fe0 qnbfzTB1tYkjU78loMWFaLa00ftSxP/DtQ//iYVyfVNfcCwfDszXLOqlkvGmY1/Y F1ON0ONekDZkGJsDoS6QdiUSn8RZ2mHArGEWMV00EV5DCIbCXRvywXV43ckx8Z+3 B8qUJhBqJ8RS2F+vTs3DTaXqcktgJ4UkhYC2c1gImcPRyGrK9VY0sCT+1iA+wp/O v6rDpkeNksZ9fFSyoY2o =ECSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- Hervé Beraud Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat irc: hberaud https://github.com/4383/ https://twitter.com/4383hberaud -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
wsFcBAABCAAQBQJb4AwCCRAHwXRBNkGNegAALSkQAHrotwCiL3VMwDR0vcja10Q+ Kf31yCutl5bAlS7tOKpPQ9XN4oC0ZSThyNNFVrg8ail0SczHXsC4rOrsPblgGRN+ RQLoCm2eO1AkB0ubCYLaq0XqSaO+Uk81QxAPkyPCEGT6SRxXr2lhADK0T86kBnMP F8RvGolu3EFjlqCVgeOZaR51PqwUlEhZXZuuNKrWZXg/oRiY4811GmnvzmUhgK5G 5+f8mUg74hfjDbR2VhjTeaLKp0PhskjOIKY3vqHXofLuaqFDD+WrAy/NgDGvN22g glGfj472T3xyHnUzM8ILgAGSghfzZF5Skj2qEeci9cB6K3Hm3osj+PbvfsXE/7Kw m/xtm+FjnaywZEv54uCmVIzQsRIm1qJscu20Qw6Q0UiPpDFqD7O6tWSRKdX11UTZ hwVQTMh9AKQDBEh2W9nnFi9kzSSNu4OQ1dRMcYHWfd9BEkccezxHwUM4Xyov5Fe0 qnbfzTB1tYkjU78loMWFaLa00ftSxP/DtQ//iYVyfVNfcCwfDszXLOqlkvGmY1/Y F1ON0ONekDZkGJsDoS6QdiUSn8RZ2mHArGEWMV00EV5DCIbCXRvywXV43ckx8Z+3 B8qUJhBqJ8RS2F+vTs3DTaXqcktgJ4UkhYC2c1gImcPRyGrK9VY0sCT+1iA+wp/O v6rDpkeNksZ9fFSyoY2o =ECSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
participants (3)
-
Előd Illés
-
Herve Beraud
-
Marios Andreou