<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 31/05/23 08:30, Jay Faulkner wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+sTGNd+j5MCxhd9DDADXiXr_yXi=6WbZqAsh6AvacnCJer8ow@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div>Hey,</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>I'm trying to clean up zuul-config-errors for Ironic, and
          Train has reared its head again: <a
            href="https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-lib/+/884722"
            moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/ironic-lib/+/884722</a>.</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>Is there still value in continuing to keep Train (and
          perhaps, Ussuri and Victoria) in EM at this point? Should we
          migrate them to EOL?</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>What do you all think?</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>We'd like to request that train remains until mid-August, then it
      can EOL. The cinder backports may well take a decent proportion of
      this time.<br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+sTGNd+j5MCxhd9DDADXiXr_yXi=6WbZqAsh6AvacnCJer8ow@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>-</div>
        <div>Jay Faulkner</div>
        <div>Ironic PTL</div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at
            3:12 PM Steve Baker <<a href="mailto:sbaker@redhat.com"
              moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">sbaker@redhat.com</a>>
            wrote:<br>
          </div>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
            0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
            rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
            <div>
              <p><br>
              </p>
              <div>On 12/10/22 05:53, Jay Faulkner wrote:<br>
              </div>
              <blockquote type="cite">
                <div dir="ltr">
                  <div>We discussed stable branches in the most recent
                    ironic meeting (<a
href="https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/ironic/2022/ironic.2022-10-10-15.01.log.txt"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/ironic/2022/ironic.2022-10-10-15.01.log.txt</a>).
                    The decision was made to do the following:</div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>EOL these branches:</div>
                  <div>- stable/queens</div>
                  <div>- stable/rocky</div>
                  <div>- stable/stein</div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>Reduce testing considerably on these branches,
                    and only backport critical bugfixes or security
                    bugfixes:</div>
                  <div>- stable/train</div>
                  <div>- stable/ussuri</div>
                  <div>- stable/victoria</div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </blockquote>
              <p>Just coming back to this, keeping stable/train jobs
                green has become untenable so I think its time we
                consider EOLing it.</p>
              <p>It is the extended-maintenance branch of interest to
                me, so I'd be fine with stable/ussuri and
                stable/victoria being EOLed also.<br>
              </p>
              <blockquote type="cite">
                <div dir="ltr">
                  <div>Our remaining branches will continue to get most
                    eligible patches backported to them.</div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>This email, plus earlier communications including
                    a tweet, will serve as notice that these branches
                    are being EOL'd.</div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>Thanks,</div>
                  <div>Jay Faulkner<br>
                  </div>
                </div>
                <br>
                <div class="gmail_quote">
                  <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Oct 4, 2022
                    at 11:18 AM Jay Faulkner <<a
                      href="mailto:jay@gr-oss.io" target="_blank"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">jay@gr-oss.io</a>>
                    wrote:<br>
                  </div>
                  <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
                    0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
                    rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
                    <div dir="ltr">
                      <div>Hi all,</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>Ironic has a large amount of stable branches
                        still in EM. We need to take action to ensure
                        those branches are either retired or have CI
                        repaired to the point of being usable. <br>
                      </div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>Specifically, I'm looking at these branches
                        across all Ironic projects:</div>
                      <div>- stable/queens</div>
                      <div>- stable/rocky</div>
                      <div>- stable/stein</div>
                      <div>- stable/train</div>
                      <div>- stable/ussuri</div>
                      <div>- stable/victoria<br>
                      </div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>In lieu of any volunteers to maintain the CI,
                        my recommendation for all the branches listed
                        above is that they be marked EOL. If someone
                        wants to volunteer to maintain CI for those
                        branches, they can propose one of the below
                        paths be taken instead:<br>
                      </div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>1 - Someone volunteers to maintain these
                        branches, and also report the status of CI of
                        these older branches periodically on the Ironic
                        whiteboard and in Ironic meetings. If you feel
                        strongly that one of these branches needs to
                        continue to be in service; volunteering in this
                        way is how to save them.</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>2 - We seriously reduce CI. Basically
                        removing all tempest tests to ensure that CI
                        remains reliable and able to merge emergency or
                        security fixes when needed. In some cases; this
                        still requires CI fixes as some older inspector
                        branches are failing *installing packages* in
                        unit tests. I would still like, in this case,
                        that someone volunteers to ensure the minimalist
                        CI remains happy.<br>
                      </div>
                      <br>
                      <div>My intention is to let this message serve as
                        notice and a waiting period; and if I've not
                        heard any response here or in Monday's Ironic
                        meeting (in 6 days), I will begin taking action
                        on retiring these branches.</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>This is simply a start; other branches
                        (including bugfix branches) are also in bad
                        shape in CI, but getting these retired will
                        significantly reduce the surface area of
                        projects and branches to evaluate.</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>I know it's painful to drop support for these
                        branches; but we've provided good EM support for
                        these branches for a long time and by pruning
                        them away, we'll be able to save time to
                        dedicate to other items.</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>Thanks,</div>
                      <div>Jay Faulkner </div>
                    </div>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
              </blockquote>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>