Open Stack

Steven Dake (stdake) wrote:
>> I don't mind that much for stable/liberty, since it predates the
>> "officialness" of Kolla: I'm fine with any solution there. I'm more
>> concerned about stable/mitaka and going forward. Stable branches are
>> supposed to be known quantities, slow moving and safe changes. What
>> you're proposing wouldn't be an option for stable/mitaka -- so I'd like
>> to make sure we don't find ourselves in a similar situation in the future.
>
> Going forward this will not happen again.  I agree a stable branch should
> be a slow rate of change repository but also a safe place to rely on.  At
> present stable/liberty is completely unsafe, so much so that I personally
> wrote a document in our docs.oo pages that says "DON'T UE IT".  We are
> only backporting high/critical bugs which are legitimate bugs and not
> features to our stable branches.  Note we will be backporting any gate
> changes, (which could be considered "features", but this is to simplify
> our lives so we don't have different gates for different versions of
> OpenStack.
>
> The main reason this won't happen again is we have decoupled the ansible
> 1.9 pin on docker 1.8.2.  Now we can use any version of Docker we need,
> which is 1.10 and greater.
>
> Hope the context is useful.

OK, as I said, liberty is pre-official so I'm fine with any solution 
here. We seem to be in agreement that the proposed solution should not 
be applied on stable/mitaka and later.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)