Open Stack

That may help, of course, but I gues it could also be capacity related.

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 11:42 AM Takashi Yamamoto <yamamoto at midokura.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Lucas Alvares Gomes
> <lucasagomes at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 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.
>
> and lack of visibility of the fix of the dashboard? :-)
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/479138/
>
> >
> >>> 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
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20171220/19c94e43/attachment.html>