On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:55:50PM -0700, Jim Rollenhagen wrote:
> [snip]
>
> I also put an informational spec about this change up in the
> ironic-specs repo: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/185171/. My goal was
> to discuss this in the spec, but the mailing list is fine too. There are
> some un
On 28 May 2015 at 15:55, Jim Rollenhagen wrote:
> ...
>
I also put an informational spec about this change up in the
> ironic-specs repo: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/185171/. My goal was
> to discuss this in the spec, but the mailing list is fine too. There are
> some unanswered questions in
Excerpts from Thomas Goirand's message of 2015-05-29 15:11:25 +0200:
> On 05/28/2015 06:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > tl;dr;
> >
> > At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
> > the current release model and came up with some ideas to addre
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 8:11 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 05/28/2015 06:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > tl;dr;
> >
> > At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
> > the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
> > I
Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2015-05-29 12:12:51 +0200:
> Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> > [...]
> > The alternative we discussed:
> > - use feature branches for risky / large work, keeping total # of
> > branches small, and rebasing them regularly on master
> > - keep trunk moving qu
On 05/28/2015 06:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> tl;dr;
>
> At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
> the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
> I had a brief follow-up conversation with Doug and Thierry, but I'd
> li
On 2015-05-29 11:47:36 +0200 (+0200), Thierry Carrez wrote:
[...]
> As far as vulnerability management goes, we already publish the
> "master" fix as part of the advisory, so people can easily find
> that. The only thing the VMT might want to reconsider is: when an
> issue is /only/ present in the
Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> [...]
> The alternative we discussed:
> - use feature branches for risky / large work, keeping total # of
> branches small, and rebasing them regularly on master
> - keep trunk moving quickly for smaller / less risky / refactoring changes
> - "slow down" for a week o
Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote:
>>> - OpenStack coordinated releases are taken from latest independent release
>>> - that release will then get backports & stable maintenance, other
>>> independent releases don't
>>
>> So no stable branch for other independent releases? What if serious security
>> issue
Hi
> Note, that will need some scheduling anyway, so that we can slow down a week
> before. So probably still some milestone process required, wdyt?
>
We can cut a release and establish it one or two weeks before the
official OpenStack release. But prior to that we can just cut a
release whenever
On 05/28/2015 06:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
Hi all,
tl;dr;
At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
I had a brief follow-up conversation with Doug and Thierry, but I'd
like this to be
On Thursday, May 28, 2015, Devananda van der Veen
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> tl;dr;
>
> At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
> the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
> I had a brief follow-up conversation with Doug and Thierry, but I'd
>
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Devananda van der Veen <
devananda@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> tl;dr;
>
> At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
> the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
> I had a brief follow-up conversation
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 12:54:58PM -0400, Monty Taylor wrote:
> On 05/28/2015 12:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > tl;dr;
> >
> > At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
> > the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them
> On May 28, 2015, at 9:54 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:
>
> On 05/28/2015 12:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> tl;dr;
>>
>> At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
>> the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
>> I had a
On 05/28/2015 12:41 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> tl;dr;
>
> At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
> the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
> I had a brief follow-up conversation with Doug and Thierry, but I'd
> li
Hi all,
tl;dr;
At the summit, the Ironic team discussed the challenges we've had with
the current release model and came up with some ideas to address them.
I had a brief follow-up conversation with Doug and Thierry, but I'd
like this to be discussed more openly and for us (the Ironic dev
communi
17 matches
Mail list logo
