Open Stack

On Tue, 2011-12-06 at 14:12 -0800, Duncan McGreggor wrote:
> On 06 Dec 2011 - 13:52, Duncan McGreggor wrote:
> > On 06 Dec 2011 - 21:14, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > > Tim Bell wrote:
> > > > I'm not clear on who will be maintaining the stable/diablo  branch.
> > > > The people such as EPEL for RedHat systems need to have something
> > > > with the appropriate bug fixes back ported.
> > > >
> > > > There are an increasing number of sites looking to deploy in
> > > > production and cannot follow the latest development version.
> > >
> > > Agreed on the need, we discussed this at length during the design
> > > summit. The stable branches have been established and are maintained by
> > > the "OpenStack Stable Branch Maintainers" team. Currently this team is
> > > mostly made of distribution members (Ubuntu and Fedora/RedHat, mostly)
> > > collaborating on a single branch to avoid duplication of effort.
> > >
> > > See:
> > > https://launchpad.net/~openstack-stable-maint
> > > http://wiki.openstack.org/StableBranch
> >
> > Okay, I think this mostly addresses item #4 that I wanted to add to your
> > summary, Thierry.
> >
> > I do have the following minor concerns, though:
> >
> >  * that wiki page's summary (intro sentence) only specifically mentions
> >    Diablo; I'd like to see something along the lines of "currently
> >    focusing on Diablo. If these processes evolve into a successful
> >    model, they will be applied to all future releases."

Added.

> >  * the discussion on the page treats this as an experiment (this is
> >    good!), but I'd like to see a phrase alone the lines of "if this
> >    experiment is successful, we will do X to ensure these processes
> >    become an official part of the workflow."

Cleaned up the "this is an experiment" text a bit, it's gone beyond an
experiment now I think.

> > These are tiny things, but I think they will better set expectations and
> > give more warm fuzzies to organizations thinking about deploying
> > OpenStack in production environments, seeing that we're considering the
> > long-term (given success of the experiment).
> >
> > In addition, I would like to emphasize Tim's point from earlier, though:
> > it's not just packaging...

Note that the stable-maint team has no involvement with upstream
packaging, if that's what you're talking about.

Cheers,
Mark.