Open Stack

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 8:17 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrachys at redhat.com> wrote:
> - Releases page on wiki [2] calls the branch ‘Security-supported’ (and it’s
> not clear what it implies)

I saw this same thing yesterday when it was pointed out in the DVR IRC
meeting [1].  I have a hard time believing that we want to abandon bug
fix support for Kilo especially given recent attempts to be more
proactive about it [2] (which I applaud).  I suspect that there has
simply been a mis-communication and we need to get the story straight
in the wiki pages which Ihar pointed out.

> - StableBranch page though requires that we don’t merge non-critical bug
> fixes there: "Only critical bugfixes and security patches are acceptable”

Seems a little premature for Kilo.  It is little more than 6 months old.

> Some projects may want to continue backporting reasonable (even though
> non-critical) fixes to older stable branches. F.e. in neutron, I think there
> is will to continue providing backports for the branch.

+1  I'd like to reiterate my support for backporting appropriate and
sensible bug fixes to Kilo.

> I wonder though whether we would not break some global openstack rules by
> continuing with those backports. Are projects actually limited about what
> types of bug fixes are supposed to go in stable branches, or we embrace
> different models of stable maintenance and allow for some freedom per
> project?

Carl

[1] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_dvr/2015/neutron_dvr.2015-11-04-15.00.log.html
[2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-October/077236.html