[TripleO] moving stable/rocky for tripleo repos to unmaintained (+ then EOL) OK?
marios at redhat.com
Mon Jan 18 09:21:43 UTC 2021
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 7:01 PM Herve Beraud <hberaud at redhat.com> wrote:
> Sorry for my late reply, and thanks for the heads up.
> Can't we move directly to EOL ?
> I don't see reason to keep an unmaintained repo open, and if the repos
> remain open and patches merged then it's not really unmaintained repos.
> The goal of the extended maintenance was to offer more chances to
> downstream maintainers to get/share patches and fixes, if you decide to not
> maintain them anymore then I would suggest you to move to "EOL" directly,
> it would be less misleading.
> Notice that if you move rocky to eol all the corresponding branches will
> be dropped in your repos.
> Also notice that last week we proposed a new kind of tag (<series>-last)
>  for Tempest's needs, but because tempest is branchless...
> Maybe we could extend this notion (-last) to allow the project to reflect
> the last step...
> It could reflect that it will be your last release, and that the project
> is near from the end.
> But if you don't plan to merge patches, or if you don't have patches to
> merge anymore, then I would really suggest to you to move directly to EOL,
> else it means that you're not really "unmaintained".
OK thanks very much Herve as always for your time and thoughts here. I am
not against the EOL I just thought it was more of a requirement to declare
it 'unmaintained' first. The advantage is it is a softer path to completely
closing it off for any future submissions. Possibly the '-last' tag fits
this need but if I have understood correctly it might need some adjustment
to the definition of that tag ('we could extend this notion') and honestly
I don't know if it is necessary. More likely straight to EOL is what we
I will bring this up again in tomorrow's tripleo irc meeting
and point to this thread. Let's see what other opinions there are around
EOL vs -last for stable/rocky
thank you, marios
> Hopefully it will help you to find the solution that fits your needs.
> Let me know if you have more questions.
>  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/770265
>  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-team-guide/+/769821
> Le ven. 15 janv. 2021 à 16:52, Marios Andreou <marios at redhat.com> a
> écrit :
>> 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 
>>> 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  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)  in April 2020 with .
>>> We have already reduced our CI commitment for rocky - these  are the
>>> current check/gate jobs and these  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  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
>>>  https://releases.openstack.org/teams/tripleo.html#rocky
>>>  http://paste.openstack.org/raw/800464/
>>>  https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/709912
> Hervé Beraud
> Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat
> irc: hberaud
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openstack-discuss