[openstack-dev] [all][oslo] official recommendations to handle oslo-incubator sync requests

Ihar Hrachyshka ihrachys at redhat.com
Fri Sep 12 16:51:02 UTC 2014

Hash: SHA512

There seems to be no objections to that wording, so I went forward and
added it to [1], plus added the note about those rules to [2].

[1]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Oslo#Syncing_Code_from_Incubator
[2]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch#Proposing_Fixes

On 19/08/14 15:52, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> Hi all,
> I've found out there are no clear public instructions on how to
> handle oslo-incubator synchronizations in master and stable
> branches neither at [1] nor at [2]. Though my observations show
> that there is some oral tradition around community on how we handle
> those review, as follows:
> 1. For master oslo-incubator sync requests, we tend to sync the
> whole modules or even all the modules that a project uses (unless
> some specific obstacles to do so). This is to use the latest and
> greatest code from Oslo subproject, fetch all possible bug fixes
> and goodies, and make the synchronized copy of it as similar to
> upstream (=oslo-incubator) as possible.
> 2. For stable branches, the process is a bit different. For those 
> branches, we don't generally want to introduce changes that are
> not related to specific issues in a project. So in case of
> backports, we tend to do per-patch consideration when synchronizing
> from incubator.
> 3. Backporting for stable branches is a bit complicated process.
> When reviewing synchronization requests for those branches, we
> should not only check that the code is present in all consequent
> branches of the appropriate project (f.e. for Havana, in both Juno
> and Icehouse), but also that the patches being synchronized were
> successfully backported to corresponding stable branches of
> oslo-incubator. So the usual way of oslo-incubator bug fix is (in
> case of e.g. Neutron):
> oslo-incubator (master) -> neutron (master) -> oslo-incubator 
> (stable/icehouse) -> neutron (stable/icehouse).
> [For Havana, it's even more complicated, introducing more elements
> in the backporting chain.]
> I hope I've described the existing oral tradition correctly.
> Please comment on that, and if we're ok with the way it's written
> above, I'd like to update our wiki pages ([1] and [2]) with that.
> [1]: 
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReviewChecklist#Oslo_Syncing_Checklist
>  [2]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch
> Cheers, /Ihar
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list