On Monday, November 25, 2013 10:14:00 AM, Anne Gentle wrote:
On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 5:10 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org <mailto:thie...@openstack.org>> wrote: Chuck Short wrote: > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Michael Still <mi...@stillhq.com <mailto:mi...@stillhq.com> > <mailto:mi...@stillhq.com <mailto:mi...@stillhq.com>>> wrote: > >> So, a few questions... >> >> - If there are no users shall we remove it from Havana and Grizzly as >> well, or does that violate our stability principles too much? > > > Speaking with my stable maintainers hat on I would personally NACK this > since > it doesnt meet the standard of a stable maintenance requirement, imho. It definitely doesn't meet our stable maintenance rules. We want people to be able to safely upgrade to the latest stable/* when they are users of the release. We don't add new features, removing them would be even worse. >> - If we don't remove the code from stable, what about removing all >> references from the stable docs and putting in a warning saying that >> powervm is a dead end instead? I want to minimise confusion on the >> part of people deploying stable releases. > > This would be okay in my opinion. At the very minimum I would add the "dead-end" comment to the Havana release notes. If Anne is fine by it, it could also be added to the stable/havana version of the docs. PowerVM was mostly documented in developer docs in the nova repo. It also has entries in the Configuration Reference in the nova.conf options tables from our autodoc process. Those will just stay in the stable/havana repo, but I'm okay with backporting a note to stable/havana with a clear message as to the driver's fate. We also have a mention of PowerVM in stable/grizzly where we could also place a note. Release notes are a good place for this as well, thanks Russell. Tracking with https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1254780 -- feel free to add the nova project as well to ensure the docs in the nova repo are removed. I do want to point out that we don't have adequate documentation of other drivers, like Hyper-V and Xen, just want to make sure you all know there are gaps and documentation isn't the indicator of "acceptance" of a hypervisor driver. Thanks - Anne -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) _______________________________________________ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack@lists.openstack.org> Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack _______________________________________________ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
Also to relay what was discussed in nova IRC this morning, this topic is on the release meeting agenda for tomorrow:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ProjectMeeting#Agenda_for_next_meeting -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann _______________________________________________ Mailing list: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack Post to : openstack@lists.openstack.org Unsubscribe : http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
