Open Stack

Hi Brian,

Sorry to hear that :( As a side note, maybe it's good to mention, that 
bugfixes are getting merged in Pike now as gate is fixed (e.g. in Nova 
[1], where I am stable core, and also in Neutron[2]).

Maybe before you EOL Cinder's Pike, it would be nice to review & merge 
at least the open patches [3], I can help with the review as soon as the 
gate fixing patch [4] has merged (which I have already reviewed :)). To 
be honest I haven't reviewed yet the other patches because I reviewed 
first the gate fixing ones and waited them to get merged. Anyway, I'm 
always happy to help with stable reviews, at least from stable core 
point of view (but I can only give +1 for patches in Cinder).

About the Cinder zuul jobs in EOL candidate branches: I'll go through 
the zuul jobs in Pike and Ocata in Cinder to look for unused job 
definitions and propose deletion patch if there are such.

Thanks,

Előd

[1] 
https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/nova+branch:stable/pike+status:merged
[2] 
https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/neutron+branch:stable/pike+status:merged
[3] 
https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/cinder+branch:stable/pike+status:open
[4] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737094/


On 2020. 07. 22. 21:28, Brian Rosmaita wrote:

> On 7/9/20 12:27 PM, Előd Illés wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Sorry for sticking my nose into this thread (again o:)), just a 
>> couple of thoughts:
>
> Always happy to see your nose :-)
>
>> - we had a rough month with failing Devstack and Tempest (and other) 
>> jobs, but thanks to Gmann and others we could fix most of the issues 
>> (except Tempest in Ocata, that's why it is announced generally as 
>> Unmaintained [0])
>> - this added some extra time to show a branch as unmaintained
>> - branches in extended maintenance are not that busy branches, but 
>> still, I see some bugfix backports coming in even in Pike (in spite 
>> of failing gate in the last month)
>> - Lee announced nova's Unmaintained state in the same circumstances, 
>> as we just fixed Pike's devstack - and I also sent a reply that I 
>> will continue to maintain nova's stable/pike as it is getting in a 
>> better shape now
>>
>> Last but not least: in cinder, there are "Zuul +1"d gate fixes both 
>> for Pike [1] (and Queens [2]), so it's not that hopeless.
>>
>> I don't want to keep a broken branch open in any cost, but does it 
>> cost that much? I mean, if there is the possibility to push a fix, 
>> why don't we let it happen? Right now Cinder Pike's gate seems 
>> working (with the fix, which needs an approve [1]).
>
> We discussed this at the past two Cinder project team meetings, once 
> to think about the idea and again today to make sure there were no 
> second thoughts.  I proposed that we would keep Pike open if someone 
> on the cinder stable maintenance team were willing to "adopt" the 
> branch.  The silence was deafening.  In short, no one on the core team 
> is interested in approving patches for stable/pike, and no one in the 
> wider Cinder project team of active contributors has any objections.
>> My suggestion is that let Pike still be in Extended Maintenance as it 
>> is still have a working gate ([1]) and EOL Ocata as it was already 
>> about to happen according to the mail thread [0], if necessary.
>
> We appreciate your suggestion, but the feeling of the Cinder project 
> team is that we should EOL both Pike and Ocata.
>
>>
>> Also, please check the steps in 'End of Life' chapter of the stable 
>> guideline [3] and let me offer my help if you need it for the 
>> transition.
>
> I appreciate your offer.  I'll have the EOL patches posted shortly.  
> The only thing I'm not sure about is whether there are zuul jobs in 
> other repositories that are not needed any more.  I don't think there 
> are, but I may be having a failure of imagination in deciding where to 
> look.
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Előd
>>
>> [0] 
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-May/thread.html#15112 
>>
>> [1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737094/
>> [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/737093/
>> [3] 
>> https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#end-of-life 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2020. 07. 08. 23:14, Brian Rosmaita wrote:
>>> Lee Yarwood recently announced the change to 'unmaintained' status 
>>> of nova stable/ocata [0] and stable/pike [1] branches, with the 
>>> clever idea of back-dating the 6 month period of un-maintenance to 
>>> the most recent commit to each branch.  I took a look at cinder 
>>> stable/ocata and stable/pike, and the most recent commit to each is 
>>> 8 months ago and 7 months ago, respectively.
>>>
>>> The Cinder team discussed this at today's Cinder meeting and agreed 
>>> that this email will serve as notice to the OpenStack Community that 
>>> the following openstack/cinder branches have been in 'unmaintained' 
>>> status for the past 6 months:
>>> - stable/ocata
>>> - stable/pike
>>>
>>> The Cinder team hereby serves notice that it is our intent to ask 
>>> the openstack infra team to tag each as EOL at its current HEAD and 
>>> delete the branches two weeks from today, that is, on Wednesday, 22 
>>> July 2020.
>>>
>>> (This applies also to the other stable-branched cinder repositories, 
>>> that is, os-brick, python-cinderclient, and 
>>> python-cinderclient-extension.)
>>>
>>> Please see [2] for information about the maintenance phases and what 
>>> action would need to occur before 22 July for a branch to be adopted 
>>> back to the 'extended maintenance' phase.
>>>
>>> On behalf of the Cinder team, thank you for your attention to this 
>>> matter.
>>>
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> brian
>>>
>>>
>>> [0] 
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-July/015747.html 
>>>
>>> [1] 
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2020-July/015798.html 
>>>
>>> [2] https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html
>>>
>>
>>
>
>