Open Stack

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

What about release notes? How can we now communicate some changes that
require operator consideration or action?

Ihar

On 05/29/2015 03:41 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> TL;DR: - We propose to stop tagging coordinated point releases
> (like 2015.1.1) - We continue maintaining stable branches as a
> trusted source of stable updates for all projects though
> 
> Long version:
> 
> At the "stable branch" session in Vancouver we discussed recent 
> evolutions in the stable team processes and how to further adapt
> the work of the team in a "big tent" world.
> 
> One of the key questions there was whether we should continue
> doing stable point releases. Those were basically tags with the
> same version number ("2015.1.1") that we would periodically push to
> the stable branches for all projects.
> 
> Those create three problems.
> 
> (1) Projects do not all follow the same versioning, so some
> projects (like Swift) were not part of the "stable point releases".
> More and more projects are considering issuing intermediary
> releases (like Swift does), like Ironic. That would result in a
> variety of version numbers, and ultimately less and less projects
> being able to have a common "2015.1.1"-like version.
> 
> (2) Producing those costs a non-trivial amount of effort on a very
> small team of volunteers, especially with projects caring about
> stable branches in various amounts. We were constantly missing the 
> pre-announced dates on those ones. Looks like that effort could be 
> better spent improving the stable branches themselves and keeping
> them working.
> 
> (3) The resulting "stable point releases" are mostly useless.
> Stable branches are supposed to be always usable, and the
> "released" version did not undergo significantly more testing.
> Issuing them actually discourages people from taking whatever point
> in stable branches makes the most sense for them, testing and
> deploying that.
> 
> The suggestion we made during that session (and which was approved
> by the session participants) is therefore to just get rid of the
> "stable point release" concept altogether for non-libraries. That
> said:
> 
> - we'd still do individual point releases for libraries (for
> critical bugs and security issues), so that you can still depend on
> a specific version there
> 
> - we'd still very much maintain stable branches (and actually focus
> our efforts on that work) to ensure they are a continuous source of
> safe upgrades for users of a given series
> 
> Now we realize that the cross-section of our community which was
> present in that session might not fully represent the consumers of
> those artifacts, which is why we expand the discussion on this
> mailing-list (and soon on the operators ML).
> 
> If you were a consumer of those and will miss them, please explain
> why. In particular, please let us know how consuming that version
> (which was only made available every n months) is significantly
> better than picking your preferred time and get all the current
> stable branch HEADs at that time.
> 
> Thanks in advance for your feedback,
> 
> [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-relmgt-stable-branch
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVaIMzAAoJEC5aWaUY1u57/iIIANPync0FRB0Pe77fBWXEuCqX
jUdoRmhQR3kzGar5UYUXAh5wa2RD/xT1JIlrwjaz4I0jKKGs7nQJ2RoTG68OtgXf
Dk3WzVg7GgmJXrzFim1cACIzDmrX704gegfCSmf8qd0WC03AT3gI/uSR0NYmiW75
xBWSltPPt1T0PaKgV9lLQ6kyCjzdUySve4815jtGPf1hZUpyQlw1+7NE9LEUfbw8
P+wLCB4UyIQ00Hjf90pnjVOT6bhMQ2/2ldoPZsDTCI5PWB52Mqk9ZteuC/1QLBkS
OSRD4fZSMeGDXkSTpIKStZm3J36cM9BGsFzC2OcZ+C52yE3vS4g7cBFaPlLub6k=
=tP/b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----