Open Stack

Sean Mooney <smooney at redhat.com> writes:

> On Tue, 2019-08-13 at 07:57 -0700, James E. Blair wrote:
>> Since we take particular pride in our community participation, the fact
>> that we have not been able or willing to do this correctly reflects very
>> poorly on us.  I would rather that we not do this at all than do it
>> badly, so I think this should be the last release with a name.  I've
>> proposed that change here:
>> 
>>   https://review.opendev.org/675788
>
> not to takethis out of context but it is rather long thread so i have sniped
> the bit i wanted to comment on.
>
> i thnik not nameing release would be problemeatic on two fronts.
> one without a common comunity name i think codename or other conventint names
> are going to crop up as many have been refering to the U release as the unicorn
> release just to avoid the  confusion between "U" and "you" when speak about the release
> untill we have an offical name. if we had no offical names i think we woudl keep using
> those placeholders at least on irc or in person. (granted we would not use them for code
> or docs)
>
> that is a minor thing but the more distributive issue i see is that nova's U release
> will be 21.0.0? and neutorns U release will be 16.0.0? without a name to refer to the
> set of compatiable project for a given version we woudl only have the
> letter and form a marketing
> perspective and even from development perspective i think that will be problematic.
>
> we could just have the V release but i think it loses something in clarity.

That's a good point.

Maybe we could just number them?  V would be "OpenStack Release 22".

Or we could refer to them by date, as we used to, but without attempting
to use dates as actual version numbers.

-Jim