From: Steven Dake <std...@cisco.com<mailto:std...@cisco.com>>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 6:28 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: [openstack-dev] [kolla][vote] port neutron thin containers to 
stable/liberty

Folks,

There were not enough core reviewers to pass a majority approval of the neutron 
thin container backport idea, so we separated it out from fixing stable/liberty 
itself.

I am going to keep voting open for *2* weeks this time.  The reason for the two 
weeks is I would like a week of discussion before people just blindly vote ;)

Voting begins now and concludes March 4th.  Since this is a policy decision, no 
veto votes are permitted, just a +1 and a  -1.  Abstaining is the same as 
voting -1.


Just kicking this conversation off, this feels a lot like an exception to me.  
The problem with exceptions is that if we make one, we set a precedent that we 
will make exceptions in the future.  This means stable/* could become free for 
feature backport requests of all types.  For example, Id like reconfigure in 
stable/liberty.  I really need it for $$DAYJOB$$ but I don't think its the 
right way to manage the stable/liberty branch (backporting reconfigure).  In 
the same way, I think thin neutron containers are in the same category - a 
feature.

We have already made a decision we are going to fix Liberty so its stable 
because of data loss problems.  While we are using new features to do this, the 
rationale is that we have a highly critical defect with the implementation and 
design of stable/liberty that needs to be rectified.  In my mind, this is a 
different scenario then a backport of a pure feature for feature's sake.

Even backporting reconfgiure would make more sense under a critical defect (the 
fact that COPY_ONCE doesn't restart containers on redeploy so once a config is 
deployed, its permanent).  I can't think of such argument for neutron thin 
containers although it is 6:30AM :).

I'd like to hear that argument.

Regards
-steve


__________________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to