Open Stack

On 02/27/2013 09:09 AM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
> This was discussed in #openstack-dev, as I recall.
>
> The goal in these migrations was to support folsom <--> grizzly, not
> necessarily supporting intermediate milestones. I'm not aware of anyone
> doing continuous deployments of keystone, if but if migrating commit to
> commit is the community's expectation, I'm more happy to ensure that
> happens moving forward -- I just wasn't aware that was a concern here.
>
> Thanks for the feedback, and apologies for any inconvenience!

If that's true, Keystone took a wildly different interpretation of this 
than all other projects, which is really problematic.

We really need to allow people to roll forward one git commit at a time.

So how much damage has been done in the migrations so far? is it 
recoverable at this point so that someone who has been tracking forward 
will have a db anything like someone that went from F -> G?

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
IBM Linux Technology Center
email: sdague at linux.vnet.ibm.com
alt-email: sldague at us.ibm.com