[ironic][stable] Include ironic-core in ironic-stable-maint ?
thierry at openstack.org
Tue Aug 4 08:54:39 UTC 2020
Julia Kreger wrote:
> In essence, our stable branch approvers are largely down to Dmitry,
> Riccardo, and Myself. I think this needs to change and I'd like to
> propose that we go ahead and change ironic-stable-maint to just
> include ironic-core in order to prevent the bottleneck and conflict
> and risk which this presents.
> I strongly believe that our existing cores would all do the right
> thing if presented with the question of if a change needed to be
> merged. So honestly I'm not concerned by this proposal. Plus, some of
> our sub-projects have operated this way for quite some time.
> Thoughts, concerns, worries?
Sounds good to me.
Stable branch backport approvals follow different rules from development
branch changes, which is why historically we used separate groups -- so
that all -core do not need to know the stable policy rules.
But today -core groups evolve less quickly and can probably be taught
the stable policy, so I'm not too concerned either. Maybe it's a good
time to remind them of the stable policy doc though, in particular the
"appropriate fixes" section:
More information about the openstack-discuss