Open Stack

On 01/29/2013 01:38 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 13:26 +0200, Gary Kotton wrote:
>> On 01/29/2013 01:02 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>>> Hi Dave,
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 10:31 +0000, Daviey Walker wrote:
>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>
>>>> Hope you are well.
>>>>
>>>> You've probably noticed that I accepted a few merges to stable/folsom.
>>>>    I spotted on a comment for one that stable/folsom was in freeze until
>>>> this Thursday.  I didn't realise this, which is why you will have seen
>>>> a few land today.
>>>>
>>>> I apologise for this, and whilst i'm confident they were safe and the
>>>> regression potential is low; I am willing to help solve any issues
>>>> this causes (Including backing them out).
>>> Thanks for the heads-up. Partly my bad, I should have been keeping a
>>> closer watch out.
>> My understanding is that the release date is the 31st. I do not recall
>> any update about the stable branch being in a frozen state. At last
>> nights Quantums meeting I mentioned that I was planning to backport some
>> patches and there were no objections.
> On Jan 22:
>
>    http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-stable-maint/2013-January/000282.html
>
>    2012.2.3 is scheduled for January 31st. I'm planning on calling
>    whatever we have on January 25th a RC and getting aggressive about
>    punting anything risky until the next release.
>
> and:
>
>    http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/project/2013/project.2013-01-22-21.02.html
>
>    2012.2.3 scheduled for Jan 31, RC Jan 24

Thanks. Guess I missed these.

>
> I -2ed some Nova changes on Friday:
>
>    https://review.openstack.org/20485
>    https://review.openstack.org/20337
>
>>> The process isn't perfect, but I'm reluctant to get into the
>>> complication of doing the equivalent of milestone-proposed for stable
>>> releases. We'll probably end up doing that eventually, though.
>> I do not think that we need to be extreme about it, but a sync a few
>> days before to understand that we are all on the same page would suffice.
> That's what we did for 2012.2.1:
>
>    http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-stable-maint/2012-November/000131.html
>
> and ended up with a regression in Nova:
>
>    http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-stable-maint/2012-December/000150.html
>
> A week really is a fairly minimal amount of time to lock things down
> before a release.
>
>>> The three changes merged since we froze were:
>>>
>>>       https://review.openstack.org/19264
>>>         nova: Fix to include error message in instance faults
>>>
>>>       https://review.openstack.org/20644
>>>         quantum: LinuxBridge: update status according to admin_state_up
>> This is not a MUST have for this release. It is very nice to have an
>> improves the usability. What is the risk - very low. It would be nice to
>> have https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20677/ in conjunction with this
>> one. Please note that the patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20676/
>> depends on the aforementioned patch.
> Please add your justifications to the review - i.e. how user-visible the
> issue, how low risk the fix is, how well tested it is etc.

Sure NP. I'll add my comments.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>