Open Stack

Hi,

By removing stable branches you mean stable branches for mitaka and
newer releases or that includes stable/liberty which already exist as
well?

I think the latter is more complicated, I don't think we should drop
stable/liberty like that because other people (apart from TripleO) may
also depend on that. I mean, it wouldn't be very "stable" if stable
branches were deleted before their supported phases.

But that said, I'm +1 to not have stable branches for newer releases.

Cheers,
Lucas

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Dmitry Tantsur <dtantsur at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> Initially we didn't plan on having stable branches for IPA at all. Our gate
> is using the prebuilt image generated from the master branch even on
> Ironic/Inspector stable branches. The branch in question was added by
> request of RDO folks, and today I got a request from trown to remove it:
>
> <trown> dtantsur: btw, what do you think the chances are that IPA gets rid
> of stable branch?
> <dtantsur> I'm +1 on that, because currently only tripleo is using this
> stable branch, our own gates are using tarball from master
> <dtantsur> s/tarball/prebuilt image/
> <trown> cool, from RDO perspective, I would prefer to have master package in
> our liberty delorean server, but I cant do that (without major hacks) if
> there is a stable/liberty branch
> <trown> LIO support being the main reason
> <trown> fwiw, I have tested master IPA on liberty and it works great
>
> So I suggest we drop stable branches from IPA. This won't affect the Ironic
> gate in any regard, as we don't use stable IPA there anyway, as I mentioned
> before. As we do know already, we'll keep IPA compatible with all supported
> Ironic and Inspector versions.
>
> Opinions?
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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