+1. Anything that lands in the high category is usually something that will have a big operational impact.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > as per [1] I imply that all projects under stable-maint-core team > supervision must abide the stable policy [2] which limits the types of > backports for N-2 branches (now it’s stable/kilo) to "Only critical > bugfixes and security patches”. With that, I remind all stable core members > about the rule. > > Since we are limited to ‘critical bugfixes’ only, and since there is no > clear definition of what ‘critical’ means, I guess we should define it for > ourselves. > > In Neutron world, we usually use Critical importance for those bugs that > break gate. High is used for those bugs that have high impact production > wise. With that in mind, I suggest we define ‘critical’ bugfixes as > Critical + High in LP. Comments on that? > > (My understanding is that we can also advocate for the change in the > global policy if we think the ‘critical only’ rule should be relaxed, but > till then it makes sense to stick to what policy says.) > > [1] > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-November/078649.html > [2] http://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/stable-branches.html > > Ihar > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Kevin Benton
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
