Open Stack

On 18/02/17 03:24, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Thomas Herve wrote:
>> [...]
>> At any rate, it's a matter of trust, a subject that comes from time to
>> time, and it's fairly divisive. In this case though, I find it ironic
>> that I can approve whatever garbage I want on master, it can make its
>> way into a release, but if I want a bugfix backported into another
>> branch, someone else has to supervise me.
>
> Originally the lock was there to make sure that people with stable/*
> rights were aware of the stable policy (in particular which changes are
> backportable depending on the support phase). Rules to apply in stable
> reviews are *completely* different from the rules to apply on master
> reviews - so being trusted for master doesn't magically make you aware
> of review rules for stable.

Yes, this is reasonable. FWIW I'm 100% confident that all of the ex-PTLs 
are familiar with the stable branch policy (I am the stable-branch 
liaison for Heat).

> That said, I thought that we now defaulted to trusting the local stable
> liaison to ensure that the policy was well-known and directly add people
> to the group... (with stable-maint being able to remove people if
> needed, ask for forgiveness rather than permission, etc.)

This seems like an appropriate policy to me. I would be happy to see it 
adopted if it hasn't been already.

> I guess that's something we could discuss in the Stable team room
> (Monday morning) at the PTG for those who will be around then.

I might stop by :)

cheers,
Zane.