Open Stack

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Mike Bayer <mbayer at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Instead of just breaking the world, and burning 10s to 100 engineer
>> hours in redo tests and investigating and addressing the break after the
>> fact.

We shouldn't let this happen in the first place.  I think this is our fault.

We need to vet new package releases before they wreak havoc.  We need
to accept new package releases by proposing a patch to update the
version and take it through the gate.  Weren't we working on this at
one point?  I understand if it isn't quite possible to do this yet but
we need to be working toward this and accelerating our efforts rather
than lashing out at package maintainers.

With the scale that openstack development has grown to, we can't
afford to let package updates do this to us.  If we have a patch to
propose accepting new versions, we could provide feedback to package
maintainers in a much more civilized and pleasant way.

> I was hoping to get a thanks for even *testing* unreleased versions of
> my entirely non-Openstack, upstream projects against Openstack itself.
>  If I did *less* effort here, and just didn't bother the way 100% of all
> other non-Openstack projects do, then I'd not have been scolded by you.

Requiring any package maintainer to be on top of every consumer of his
package doesn't scale.  We can expect that packages have good tests
and take care to maintain quality and a stability.  But to put the
responsibility for "100s of engineering hours" squarely on Mike's
shoulders because he didn't "raise it up the flagpole" is
irresponsible.  We need to take our own responsibility for the choice
to consume the package and blindly accept updates.

Carl