Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 11:50:28AM -0500, David Kranz wrote: > On 02/10/2015 10:35 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > >On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 11:19:20AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >>Joe, Matt & Matthew: > >> > >>I hear your frustration with broken stable branches. With my > >>vulnerability manageme

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On 02/10/2015 12:20 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: On 2015-02-10 11:50:28 -0500 (-0500), David Kranz wrote: [...] I would rather give up branchless tempest than the ability for real distributors/deployers/operators to collaborate on stable branches. [...] Keep in mind that branchless tempest came a

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

James E. Blair wrote: > Thierry Carrez writes: > >> I also disagree with the proposed solution. We announced a support >> timeframe for Icehouse, our downstream users made plans around it, so we >> should stick to it as much as we can. > > To be fair, if we did that, we did not communicate accur

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On 2015-02-10 11:50:28 -0500 (-0500), David Kranz wrote: [...] > I would rather give up branchless tempest than the ability for > real distributors/deployers/operators to collaborate on stable > branches. [...] Keep in mind that branchless tempest came about in part due to downstream use cases as

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On 02/10/2015 10:35 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 11:19:20AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: Joe, Matt & Matthew: I hear your frustration with broken stable branches. With my vulnerability management team member hat, responsible for landing patches there with a strict deadlin

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

Thierry Carrez writes: > I also disagree with the proposed solution. We announced a support > timeframe for Icehouse, our downstream users made plans around it, so we > should stick to it as much as we can. To be fair, if we did that, we did not communicate accurately the sentiment of the room a

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 11:19:20AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Joe, Matt & Matthew: > > I hear your frustration with broken stable branches. With my > vulnerability management team member hat, responsible for landing > patches there with a strict deadline, I can certainly relate with the > frus

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015, at 05:19 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Joe, Matt & Matthew: > > I hear your frustration with broken stable branches. With my > vulnerability management team member hat, responsible for landing > patches there with a strict deadline, I can certainly relate with the > frustrati

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, my name was called out here, so I think I need to present my thoughts on the matter. :) And sorry for writing too many words below. === As a disclaimer, I was not the one to support long support term for stable branches. On the previous summit,

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

Joe, Matt & Matthew: I hear your frustration with broken stable branches. With my vulnerability management team member hat, responsible for landing patches there with a strict deadline, I can certainly relate with the frustration of having to dive in to unbork the branch in the first place, rather

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Alan Pevec wrote: > >> >> Tracking etherpad: > >> >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/wedged-stable-gate-feb-2015 > > BTW there is a tracking etherpad updated by > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch#Stable_branch_champions > https://etherpad.openstack.org

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 03:10:28PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 2/9/2015 2:56 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:24:34PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: > >> > >> > >>On 2/9/2015 12:23 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > >>> > >>>On Feb 9, 2015 10:04 AM, "Matt Riedemann" >>>

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

>> >> Tracking etherpad: >> >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/wedged-stable-gate-feb-2015 BTW there is a tracking etherpad updated by https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch#Stable_branch_champions https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/stable-tracker linked in https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sta

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 1:02 PM, John Griffith > wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Matthew Treinish >> wrote: >> > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:24:34PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> On 2/9/2015 12:23 PM, Joe Gordon

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 1:02 PM, John Griffith wrote: > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Matthew Treinish > wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:24:34PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 2/9/2015 12:23 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > >> > > >> >On Feb 9, 2015 10:04 AM, "Matt Riedemann" >> >

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On 2/9/2015 2:56 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:24:34PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 2/9/2015 12:23 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: On Feb 9, 2015 10:04 AM, "Matt Riedemann" mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>> wrote: There are at least two blocking bugs: 1. https://bugs

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:24:34PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: >> >> >> On 2/9/2015 12:23 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: >> > >> >On Feb 9, 2015 10:04 AM, "Matt Riedemann" > >> wrote: >> > > >> > > There are at le

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Mon, Feb 09, 2015 at 01:24:34PM -0600, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > > On 2/9/2015 12:23 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > >On Feb 9, 2015 10:04 AM, "Matt Riedemann" >> wrote: > > > > > > There are at least two blocking bugs: > > > > > > 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On 2/9/2015 12:23 PM, Joe Gordon wrote: On Feb 9, 2015 10:04 AM, "Matt Riedemann" mailto:mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>> wrote: > > There are at least two blocking bugs: > > 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/grenade/+bug/1419913 > > Sounds like jogo is working a javelin fix for this. I'm not aw

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On 2/9/2015 12:03 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: There are at least two blocking bugs: 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/grenade/+bug/1419913 Sounds like jogo is working a javelin fix for this. I'm not aware of a patch to review though. 2. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+bug/1419919 I'm not s

Re: [openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

On Feb 9, 2015 10:04 AM, "Matt Riedemann" wrote: > > There are at least two blocking bugs: > > 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/grenade/+bug/1419913 > > Sounds like jogo is working a javelin fix for this. I'm not aware of a patch to review though. We need to stop trying to install tempest in the sam

[openstack-dev] [stable] juno is fubar in the gate

There are at least two blocking bugs: 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/grenade/+bug/1419913 Sounds like jogo is working a javelin fix for this. I'm not aware of a patch to review though. 2. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+bug/1419919 I'm not sure yet what's going on with this one. -- T