-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 There seems to be no objections to that wording, so I went forward and added it to [1], plus added the note about those rules to [2].
[1]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Oslo#Syncing_Code_from_Incubator [2]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch#Proposing_Fixes On 19/08/14 15:52, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Hi all, > > I've found out there are no clear public instructions on how to > handle oslo-incubator synchronizations in master and stable > branches neither at [1] nor at [2]. Though my observations show > that there is some oral tradition around community on how we handle > those review, as follows: > > 1. For master oslo-incubator sync requests, we tend to sync the > whole modules or even all the modules that a project uses (unless > some specific obstacles to do so). This is to use the latest and > greatest code from Oslo subproject, fetch all possible bug fixes > and goodies, and make the synchronized copy of it as similar to > upstream (=oslo-incubator) as possible. > > 2. For stable branches, the process is a bit different. For those > branches, we don't generally want to introduce changes that are > not related to specific issues in a project. So in case of > backports, we tend to do per-patch consideration when synchronizing > from incubator. > > 3. Backporting for stable branches is a bit complicated process. > When reviewing synchronization requests for those branches, we > should not only check that the code is present in all consequent > branches of the appropriate project (f.e. for Havana, in both Juno > and Icehouse), but also that the patches being synchronized were > successfully backported to corresponding stable branches of > oslo-incubator. So the usual way of oslo-incubator bug fix is (in > case of e.g. Neutron): > > oslo-incubator (master) -> neutron (master) -> oslo-incubator > (stable/icehouse) -> neutron (stable/icehouse). > > [For Havana, it's even more complicated, introducing more elements > in the backporting chain.] > > I hope I've described the existing oral tradition correctly. > Please comment on that, and if we're ok with the way it's written > above, I'd like to update our wiki pages ([1] and [2]) with that. > > [1]: > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReviewChecklist#Oslo_Syncing_Checklist > > [2]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch > > Cheers, /Ihar > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin) iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJUEyR2AAoJEC5aWaUY1u57QS4H+gPHfebOBKJJAdhSjTRkaR9/ cV6A/M+snCAmlL5YcdMNruwAqaotvXMmUiUL2Mdekne7GqLlTwAtSnDQxwvr7BYu m1Hu1/eRwVQZLS33UzvZRdAHJMlgD7Mq5p6w21yNKOVa+3wrXY+Q/JTAVv5i/pJ9 UQWTJpbE3DGT8j8B6jFrPbaMnjYjVrbHdGyvxqEaSdS0259kDSgSwULRmAilPRBd 3gIwZC1obqePkby7amQEIYKkPa53aFz2mSEPsWpaT2nYNLILCOcN5OLGNkdo1ksu 5gJ1hXx4MBuKbGALUO7QcdXgquXGv6O1hMq1GSi8bRsbxKbVn4XktsnS/ULqRSE= =lzyp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
