Open Stack

The vote was not exactly unanimous.

I counted the following:

1.1.0
Steven Dake +1
Paul Bourke +1
Martin Andre +1
Michal Rostecki -1
Jeff Peeler +1
Ryan Hallisey +1
Michal Rosteki -1
Michal Jasterzebski -1

Since there are 6 votes in favor out of the 11 person core review team, 1.1.0 will include backported upgrades for z and y streams.

1.2.0
Steven Dake -1
Michal Rosteki +1
Michal Jasterzebski +1

Since 1.2.0 was not what the original vote was abut, and it would be incompatible with 1.1.0, I'm not sure what to do if both votes passed.  Nonetheless, if someone from the core reviewer community requests a 1.2.0 vote as opposed to a 1.1.0 backport, please feel free to follow up with me on IRC if you wish to remain anonymous or follow up on this thread.

At this time, the current plan is to release 1.1.0 before April 1st with Docker 1.10.0+, named volumes, neutron thin containers, and upgrades from 1.1.0 to a later version (either X, Y, or Z).  We won't be backporting reconfigure, prechecks, post-deploy, TLS, or any of the other numerous features in Kolla Mitaka.

Regards,
-steve

From: Steven Dake <stdake at cisco.com<mailto:stdake at cisco.com>>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 8:03 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] exception for backporting upgrades to liberty/stable

Hi folks,

It was never really discussed if we would back-port upgrades to liberty.  This came up during  an irc conversation Friday [1], and a vote was requested.  Tthe facts of the discussion distilled are:

  *   We never agreed as a group to do back-port of upgrade during our back-port discussion
  *   An operator that can't upgrade her Z version of Kolla (1.1.1 from 1.1.0) is stuck without CVE or OSSA corrections.
  *   Because of a lack of security upgrades, the individual responsible for executing the back-port would abandon the work (but not tuse the abaondon feature for of gerrit for changes already in the queue)

Since we never agreed, in that IRC discussion a vote was requested, and I am administering the vote.  The vote request was specifically should we have a back-port of upgrade in 1.1.0.  Both parties agreed they would live with the results.

I would like to point out that not porting upgrades means that the liberty branch would essentially become abandoned unless some other brave soul takes up a backport.  I would also like to point out that that is yet another exception much like thin-containers back-port which was accepted.  See how exceptions become the way to the dark side.  We really need to stay exception free going forward (in Mitaka and later) as much as possible to prevent expectations that we will make exceptions when none should be made.

Please vote +1 (backport) or -1 (don't backport).  An abstain in this case is the same as voting -1, so please vote either way.  I will leave the voting open for 1 week until April 14th.  If there I a majority in favor, I will close voting early.  We currently require 6 votes for majority as our core team consists of 11 people.

Regards,
-steve


[1] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23kolla/%23kolla.2016-03-04.log.html#t2016-03-04T18:23:26

Warning [1] was a pretty heated argument and there may have been some swearing :)

voting.

"Should we back-port upgrades
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160308/d8ad6c77/attachment.html>