Open Stack

Hi,

>> Hi all,
>>
>> Just sending this email to try to understand the model for stable branch maintenance in networking-ovn (potentially other neutron drivers too).
>>
>> Right now, only members of the ``neutron-stable-maint`` gerrit group are able to approve patches for the stable branches; this can cause some delays when fixing things (e.g [0]) because we don't have any member in that group that is also a ``networking-ovn-core`` member. So, sometimes we have to go around and ping people to take a look at the patches and it kinda sucks.
>
>
> We had a Gerrit dashboard that helped stable reviewers stay on top of things [1], but it looks like it doesn't seem to work anymore. My suggestion would be to look into that as the lack of visibility might be the source of the recent delay.
>
> [1] https://docs.openstack.org/neutron/latest/contributor/dashboards/index.html#gerrit-dashboards

++ indeed, lack of visibility is a problem as well.

>> Is there any reason why things are set up in that way ?
>>
>> I was wondering if it would make sense to create a new group to help maintaining the stable branches in networking-ovn. The new group could include some of the core members willing to do the work + ``neutron-stable-maint`` as a subgroup. Is that reasonable, what you think about it?
>
>
> Rather than create yet another group(s), it makes sense to have an individual from each neutron project participate in the neutron-stable-maint team (whose admin rights I think are held by Ihar as neutron member), for those of whom have actually an interest in reviewing stable patches :)
>

Having a member in the current group will help, if you are comfortable
with adding a new member to the current group that would be great.

The reason why I was leaning towards having another group is because
of scope limitation. Members of the ``neutron-stable-maint`` group can
approve patches for all neutron-related projects stable branches. By
having a separated group, members would only be able to approve things
for a specific project.

The new group would also have the ``neutron-stable-maint`` as a
sub-group to it , so the members of the original group would still
able approve things everywhere.

Anyway, either ideas would help with the original problem, I'm good
with whatever approach people thinks is best.

Cheers,
Lucas