Open Stack

To play devils advocate and as someone that has had to git bisect an ugly regression once I still think its important not to break trunk. It can be much harder to deal with difficult issues like that if trunk frequently breaks.

Thanks,
Kevin
________________________________________
From: Sean McGinnis [sean.mcginnis at gmx.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 5:01 PM
To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][all] A culture change (nitpicking)

> "master should be always deployable and fully backward compatible and
> so we cant let anything in anytime that could possibly regress anyone"
>
> Should we change that attitude too? Anyone agree? disagree?
>
> Thanks,
> Dims
>
I'll definitely jump at this one.

I've always thought (and shared on the ML several times now) that our
implied
but not explicit support for CD from any random commit was a bad thing.

While I think it's good to support the idea that master is always
deployable, I
do not think it is a good mindset to think that every commit is a
"release" and
therefore should be supported until the end of time. We have a coordinated
release for a reason, and I think design decisions and fixes should be
based on
the assumption that a release is a release and the point at which we
need to be
cognizant and caring about keeping backward compatibility. Doing that for
every single commit is not ideal for the overall health of the product, IMO.

__________________________________________________________________________
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