Open Stack

Excerpts from Thomas Goirand's message of 2015-05-29 15:11:25 +0200:
> On 05/28/2015 06:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > tl;dr;
> > 
> > At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
> > the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
> > I had a brief follow-up conversation with Doug and Thierry, but I'd
> > like this to be discussed more openly and for us (the Ironic dev
> > community) to agree on a clear plan before we take action.
> > 
> > If Ironic moves to a release:independent model, it shouldn't have any
> > direct effect on other projects we integrate with -- we will continue
> > to follow release:at-6mo-cycle-end -- but our processes for how we get
> > there would be different, and that will have an effect on the larger
> > community.
> 
> Just a quick follow-up to voice the Distro's opinion (I'm sure other
> package maintainers will agree with what I'm going to write).
> 
> It's fine if you use whatever release schedule that you want. Though
> what's important for us, downstream distro, is that you make sure to
> release a longer term version at the same time as everything else, and
> that you make sure security follow-up is done properly. It's really
> important that you clearly identify the versions for which you will do
> security patch backports, so that we don't (by mistake) release a stable
> version of a given distribution with a something you wont ever give long
> term support for.
> 
> I'm sure you guys know that already, but better be safe than sorry, and
> other less experience projects may find the above useful.

We do still plan to use stable branches for those supported releases, so
as long as you're pulling from the right branch when packaging it should
work fine, right?

Doug