Open Stack

Rob Cresswell wrote:
> I've been toying with send this email for a while, but here goes: this
> all feels like overcomplication and changing of a system that doesn't
> really need to change.

Except the proposal here is actually to not change anything, but I see
what you mean.

> I've read the pros and cons, and I still can't really see a convincing
> reason not to move the PTL election to just-before-PTG, so that the new
> PTL is present for one development cycle as before.

Here is mine: it would fail to take into account that preparation for a
development cycle starts a few months /before/ PTG, not a just few weeks
before.

Talking with operators at the recent Ops midcycle, they were pretty
enthusiastic with the idea of having someone take responsibility for a
release cycle from day 0 (when you start collecting priorities) through
the development cycle, to release, up to early stable branch backports
and communication about the work that has been accomplished. The best
way to achieve that is to have that person designated in the middle of
the previous cycle, not just a few weeks before the development branches
open.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)