On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Doug Hellmann > > I'd like to come up with some way to express the time other than > N+M because in the middle of a cycle it can be confusing to know > what that means (if I want to deprecate something in August am I > far enough through the current cycle that it doesn't count?). > > Also, as we start moving more projects to doing intermediate releases > the notion of a "release" vs. a "cycle" will drift apart, so we > want to talk about "stable releases" not just any old release. >
I've always thought the appropriate equivalent for projects not following the (old) integrated release cadence was for N == six months. It sets approx. the same pace and expectation with users/deployers. For those deployments tracking trunk, a similar approach can be taken, in that deprecating a config option in M3 then removing it in N1 might be too quick, but rather wait at least the same point in the following release cycle to increment 'N'. dt -- Dean Troyer dtro...@gmail.com
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
