Open Stack

Hi Infra,

At the last summit we decided to drop milestone-proposed branches in
favor of named release branches. There are two implementation options.

* Use "stable/juno" starting from RC1

The main benefit of this approach is that the infrastructure should
"just work" by applying testing to the pre-release branch just as it
applies testing to the stable branch.

The main drawback of this approach is that pre-release and stable
branches generate different expectations (only the post-release
stable/foo is actually "stable"), and have different processes, rules
and teams responsible for them.

* Use "proposed/juno" from RC1 to release and rename the branch
"stable/juno" at release time

The main benefit of this approach is that we can apply different ACLs,
and document different processes and rules based on the name of the branch.

The main drawback is that the infrastructure must be taught to use
proposed/foo when stable/foo is not around.

In various post-summit discussions, consumers of those branches
generally expressed preference in keeping them named differently
depending on the stage of the release we were in. Infra people generally
agreed that supporting proposed/foo was not very complex, or at least
not as weird as switching ACLs for stable/foo at release time.

So it looks like we should proceed with supporting proposed/foo on
prerelease, but I wanted to do a last-minute check to make sure everyone
was still OK with that.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)