Open Stack

On Fri, Mar 13, 2015, at 06:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Clint Byrum wrote:
> > I spend a not-insignificant amount of time deciding which threads to
> > read and which to fully ignore each day, so extra threads mean extra
> > work, even with a streamlined workflow of single-key-press-per-thread.
> > 
> > So I'm wondering what people are getting from these announcements being
> > on the discussion list. I feel like they'd be better off in a weekly
> > digest, on a web page somewhere, or perhaps with a tag that could be
> > filtered out for those that don't benefit from them.
> 
> The first value of a release announcement is (obviously) to let people
> know something was released. There is a bit of a paradox there with some
> announcements being posted to openstack-announce (in theory low-traffic
> and high-attention), and some announcements being posted to
> openstack-dev (high-traffic and medium-attention). Where is the line
> drawn ?
> 
> The second value of a release announcement is the thread it creates in
> case immediate issues are spotted. I kind of like that some
> python-*client release announcements are followed-up by a "this broke
> the world" thread, all in a single convenient package. Delaying
> announcements defeats that purpose.
> 
> We need to adapt our current (restricted) usage of openstack-announce to
> a big-tent less-hierarchical future anyway: if we continue to split
> announcements, which projects are deemed "important enough" to be
> granted openstack-announce access ?
> 
> Personally in the future I'm not opposed to allowing any "openstack"
> project (big-tent definition) to post to openstack-announce (ideally in
> a standard / autogenerated format) with reply-to set to openstack-dev.
> We could use a separate list, but then release and OSSA announcements
> are the only thing we use -announce for currently, so I'm not sure it's
> worth it.
> 
> So I'm +1 on using a specific list (and setting reply-to to -dev), and
> I'm suggesting openstack-announce should be reused to avoid creating two
> classes of deliverables (-announce worthy and not).

We had complaints in the past when we *didn't* send release
announcements because people were then unaware of why a new release
might be causing changes in behavior, so we built a bunch of tools to
make it easy to create uniform and informative release note emails
containing the level of detail people wanted. So far those are only
being used by Oslo, but we're moving the scripts to the release-tools
repo to make them easy for all library maintainers to use.

These announcements are primarily for our developer community and the
folks at the distros who need to know to package the new versions. Are
we going to start having non-dev folks who subscribe to the announce
list complain about the release announcements for libraries, then? Are
enough developers subscribed to the announce list that they will see the
release messages to meet the original needs we were trying to meet?

> 
> Posting on -dev with a subject prefix would only marginally improve the
> situation (release announcements are already pretty easy to spot and
> manually filter out), so I'm +0 on that.
> 
> Weekly posts or ratelimiting would imho remove 99% of the interest of
> release announcements, so I'm -1 on that solution.
> 
> -- 
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev