Open Stack

> On 16 Oct 2015, at 19:09, Sean M. Collins <sean at coreitpro.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 11:36:13AM EDT, Salvatore Orlando wrote:
>> It might also make sense to ask contributors to resume the habit of tagging
>> bugs with 'backport-potential' even if not in the RC period.
> 
> I like this idea because it'll make Ihar's job easier :)


Kind of you Sean. ;) That said, we are not here to make my job easier but to make our product better.

Another point I want to make is that the original plan is described in terms of me doing the initial triage. I don’t want to suggest that I am the eternal one to do it. No, I am not suicidal, but buses drive nearby, so I would be glad if someone tries to take on it once in a while. ;)

Another point to consider is that backport proposers do not have +2 for their own backports (well technically they do but it’s countradictory to openstack guidelines). Since I am one of the folks who have +2 in neutron stable stadium, it could be wise to allow someone without the hammer to propose backports and me spending my vote on them. So if folks out of formal neutron-stable-maint group will join the effort, it will be better for everyone, but especially stable branch chasers.

Ihar
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20151019/e484fca0/attachment.pgp>