On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 10:24:41AM +0000, Dave Walker wrote: > Hi, > > Looking at a stable/juno cinder proposed change[0], I came across one > that introduces a new config option. > > The default is a noop change for the behaviour, so no bad surprises on > upgrade. > > These sort of changes feel like they are outside the 'no config > changes' rule, but we have not really discussed this. > > What do others think?
I don't think "no config changes" is a completely black & white rule. The most important part of it is that you don't change the semantics or default values of any existing config options in stable, because that would cause a change in behaviour for existing deployments who upgrade. If backporting a bug fix involves adding a new config parameter I think that's broadly acceptable, provided the config option does not result in a change in behaviour upon upgrade that violates the stable tree requirements. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
