Open Stack

 ---- On Wed, 05 Jul 2023 06:17:18 -0700  Rajat Dhasmana  wrote --- 
 > Hi All,
 > 
 > This is a followup to my last email[1] where a lot of discussion happenedaround the nature of EM branches and was/is it a successful model or not.
 > This was also discussed during the Vancouver summit + PTG event and alsorecently in the TC meeting concluding that we will start a discussion again onML regarding the EM model.
 > However, my original intent of the mail was not to start a wider discussion aboutthe EM model (which is a good discussion but not my intent) but a way to takefeedback on Cinder team's decision to EOL the current EM branches and if itaffects any operators, vendors etc.
 > This mail is another reminder and a way to acquire more feedback on the abovedecision so the Cinder team can plan the process accordingly. We already havepatches proposed to EOL all EM branches[2].

Thanks Rajat for pushing the EM discussion. But the consensus on EM future as
community and Cinder moving all EM to EOL are closely related. Even though we
were not able to get any solution to existing EM issue and TC is working on that
and hopefully we will come to the agreement soon (even it might be killing the EM process).

If Cinder make all their EM to EOL, it will end up other integrated projects to do the same
because of how complex the testing will be and if any CVE need fix in project A also need
fix in Cinder repo.

IMO, we should wait for overall decision on EM so that we can keep consistency to our
operator. Whatever the agreement will be, it will be same for all projects and give a clear
consistency to Operators.

-gmann

 > [1] https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2023-June/033980.html[2] https://review.opendev.org/q/topic:cinder-eol-june2023
 > ThanksRajat Dhasmana