[TripleO] moving stable/rocky for tripleo repos to unmaintained (+ then EOL) OK?

Marios Andreou marios at redhat.com
Fri Jan 15 15:52:21 UTC 2021

On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 7:01 PM Marios Andreou <marios at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hello TripleO
> I would like to propose that we move all tripleo stable/rocky repos [1] to
> "unmaintained", with a view to tagging as end-of-life in due course.
> This will allow us to focus our efforts on keeping the check and gate
> queues green and continue to deliver weekly promotions for the more recent
> and active stable/* branches train ussuri victoria and master.
> The stable/rocky repos have not had much action in the last few months - I
> collected some info at [2] about the most recent stable/rocky commits for
> each of the tripleo repos. For many of those there are no commits in the
> last 6 months and for some even longer.
> The tripleo stable/rocky repos were tagged as "extended maintenance"
> (rocky-em) [2] in April 2020 with [3].
> We have already reduced our CI commitment for rocky - these [4] are the
> current check/gate jobs and these [5] are the jobs that run for promotion
> to current-tripleo. However maintaining this doesn’t make sense if we are
> not even using it e.g. merging things into tripleo-* stable/rocky.
> Please raise your objections or any other comments or thoughts about this.
> Unless there are any blockers raised here, the plan is to put this into
> motion early in January.
> One still unanswered question I have is that since there is no
> ‘unmaintained’ tag, in the same way as we have the <release>-em or
> <release-eol> for extended maintenance and end-of-life, do we simply
> _declare_ that the repos are unmaintained? Then after a period of “0 to 6
> months” per [6] we can tag the tripleo repos with rocky-eol. If any one
> reading this knows please tell us!
o/ hello !

replying to bump the thread - this was sent ~1 month ago now and there
hasn't been any comment thus far.

ping @Herve please do you know the answer to that question in the last
paragraph above about 'declaring unmaintained' ? please thank you ;)

As discussed at the last tripleo bi-weekly we can consider moving forward
with this so I think it's prudent to give folks more chance to comment if
they object for _reason_

thanks, marios

> Thanks for reading!
> regards, marios
> [1] https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#rocky
> [2] http://paste.openstack.org/raw/800464/
> [3] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/709912
> [4]
> http://dashboard-ci.tripleo.org/d/3-DYSmOGk/jobs-exploration?orgId=1&var-influxdb_filter=branch%7C%3D%7Cstable%2Frocky
> [5]
> http://dashboard-ci.tripleo.org/d/3-DYSmOGk/jobs-exploration?orgId=1&fullscreen&panelId=9&var-influxdb_filter=type%7C%3D%7Crdo&var-influxdb_filter=job_name%7C%3D~%7C%2Fperiodic.*-rocky%2F
> [6]
> https://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html#maintenance-phases
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20210115/76d4c878/attachment.html>

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list