I think this could be a significant win for all projects (I'd like to see it adopted beyond nova). This should help ferret out the upgrade impacts that sometimes sneak up on us (and cause issues later on). +1 from me. Cheers, Morgan Fainberg IRC: morganfainberg On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net>wrote: > I think it's good to call that out, but also perhaps there should be > some discussion with such deployers such changes? > > -Rob > > On 15 October 2013 12:32, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote: > > I was talking to Dan Smith today about a patch series I was starting to > > work on. These changes affect people doing continuous deployment, so we > > came up with the idea of tagging the commits with "UpgradeImpact", > > similar to how we use DocImpact for changes that affect docs. > > > > This seems like a good convention to start using for all changes that > > affect upgrades in some way. > > > > Any comments/suggestions/objections? If not, I'll get this documented > on: > > > > > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GitCommitMessages#Including_external_references > > > > -- > > Russell Bryant > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > -- > Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com> > Distinguished Technologist > HP Converged Cloud > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131014/5b3b29fa/attachment.html>