Open Stack

On 13 March 2015 at 12:22, Clint Byrum <clint at fewbar.com> wrote:
> Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2015-03-12 13:58:20 -0700:
>> On 2015-03-12 13:22:04 -0700 (-0700), Clint Byrum wrote:
>> [...]
>> > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements
>> > being on the discussion list.
>> [...]
>>
>> The main thing I get from them is that they're being recorded to a
>> (theoretically) immutable archive indexed by a lot of other systems.
>> Some day I'd love for them to include checksums of the release
>> artifacts and be OpenPGP-signed by a release delegate for whatever
>> project is releasing, and for those people to also try to get their
>> keys signed by one another and members of the community at large.
>>
>
> I had not considered the value of that, but it seems like a good thing.
>
>> Sure, we could divert them to a different list (openstack-announce
>> was suggested in another reply), but I suspect that most people
>> subscribed to -dev are also subscribed to -announce and so it
>> wouldn't effectively decrease their E-mail volume. On the other
>> hand, a lot more people should be subscribed to -announce so that's
>> probably a good idea anyway?
>
> openstack-announce would be the opposite of less impact on the signal
> to noise ratio for anyone who does want to see them. I prioritize
> openstack-announce since I would assume announcements would mostly be
> important things reserved for a low-traffic list.
>
> So I think a tag seems like a reasonable way to keep them on the list,
> but allow for automated de-prioritization of them by those who don't
> want to see them.
>
> Could we maybe have a [release] tag mandated for these?

Rather than adding process, how about we setup automation in zuul for
this. Then email tags etc don't require human thought, training etc.

-Rob

-- 
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud