[release] Independent release jobs are still using old release job templates
hberaud at redhat.com
Mon Mar 14 13:50:06 UTC 2022
For now +1 for the option A.
The goal of moving those Oslo deliverables as independent deliverables was
to reduce our workload so instead of voting for a time consuming option
(the option B) I'd rather suggest an option C that would be moving back
those deliverables as coordinated deliverables.
This is not the first time that switching those deliverables to the
independent model causes us problems.
Le lun. 14 mars 2022 à 13:08, Stephen Finucane <stephenfin at redhat.com> a
> On Fri, 2022-03-11 at 13:38 +0000, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> > On 2022-03-11 12:26:38 +0000 (+0000), Stephen Finucane wrote:
> > [...]
> > > These initially caught me off-guard since I'm used to seeing a bot
> > > propose these changes but I've realized that all affected projects
> > > are using the "independent" release process and therefore don't
> > > receive a new stable branch nor related bot-proposed commits.
> > [...]
> > It's more than this, the "independent" release model definition is
> > that projects have opted out of central release management entirely:
> > https://releases.openstack.org/reference/release_models.html#independent
> > If you want the OpenStack release managers coordinating cycle
> > activities for those projects, I suspect we may need to redefine the
> > relationship there.
> Yes, this would be a big disadvantage of the second option I proposed. I
> "option A" will allow us to maintain the existing relationship with the
> change of "we can now potentially break your project's CI when we bump the
> runtimes used by the unversioned job template at the start of a cycle (but
> can opt out by using the versioned job templates)". This seems a reasonably
> uncontroversial change from my perspective, particularly given the
Senior Software Engineer at Red Hat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openstack-discuss