Open Stack

On 07/14/2015 10:29 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
> On 07/14/2015 12:33 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> I missed this announce...
> 
>> On 07/02/2015 05:32 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>>> Per the Icehouse EOL discussion[1] last month, now that the
>>> final 2014.1.5 release[2] is behind us I have followed our usual
>>> end of life steps for stable/icehouse branches on repos under the
>>> control of the OpenStack Release Cycle Management project-team. 
>>> Specifically, for any repos with the release:managed[3] tag, 
>>> icehouse-specific test jobs were removed from our CI system and
>>> all open change reviews were abandoned for stable/icehouse. Then
>>> the final states of the branches were tagged as "icehouse-eol"
>>> and the branches subsequently deleted.
> 
>> I believe I asked you about 10 times to keep these branches alive,
>> so that distributions could work together on a longer support, even
>> without a CI behind it.
> 
>> I have also asked for a private gerrit for maintaining the
>> Icehouse patches after EOL.
> 
>> While I understand the later means some significant work, I don't 
>> understand why you have deleted the Icehouse branches.
> 
>> Effectively, under these conditions, I am giving up doing any kind
>> of coordination between distros for security patches of Icehouse.
>> :(
> 
> As far as I know, there was no real coordination on those patches
> before, neither I saw any real steps from any side to get it up.

Well... as far as I know, you were not there during the conversations we
had at the summits about this. Neither you are on my list of Icehouse
security persons. So I fail to see how you could be in the loop for this
indeed.

> That said, anyone can come up with an initiative to maintain those
> branches under some 3party roof (just push -eol tag into github and
> advertise), and if there is real (and not just anticipated)
> collaboration going on around it, then the project may reconsider
> getting it back in the big stadium.

I have a list of contacts for each and every downstream distributions.
All of them agreed to work under this coordinated Git repo, so that we
share the same patch. The only issue is that during embargo period, we
can't discuss this type of patches in public. Which is why a private
gerrit was the way to go. Though for not-embargoed stuff, we could well
have used the already existing Gerrit infrastructure, without a CI (as
all distro are running their own tests anyway).

> I am tired to say that again and again, but there should be some
> resource investment from interested parties, upfront, before infra
> takes part of the burden on their shoulders. Asking won't help.

How do you expect to see anything happening before Icehouse effectively
gets EOL? By the way, I haven't asked anything but *not* doing
something. I don't see how much "burden" I'm putting on infra here.

Cheers,

Thomas Goirand (zigo)