-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
The sentiment that Kevin is expressing here has come up informally at past Operator’s meetups as well, which makes sense given that relatively few operators are chasing trunk vs using a stable release. I would hypothesize that there’s probably actually a fair bit of interest among operators in having well maintained stable branches but there are disincentives that keep them from pitching in more. Let’s see if we can bring that to light a bit—I’ve added an item on the etherpad to discuss this in Philadelphia at the Operator’s midcycle meetup in a few weeks. [1] If folks who are attending aren’t familiar with the current stable branch policies and team structure, you may want to read through the wiki first. [2] [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PHL-ops-meetup [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch At Your Service, Mark T. Voelker OpenStack Architect On Feb 10, 2015, at 10:20 AM, Kevin Bringard (kevinbri) <kevin...@cisco.com> wrote: Since this is sort of a topic change, I opted to start a new thread. I was reading over the "Juno is Fubar at the Gate" thread, and this bit stood out to me: So I think it's time we called the icehouse branch and marked it EOL. We originally conditioned the longer support window on extra people stepping forward to keep things working. I believe this latest issue is just the latest indication that this hasn't happened. Issue 1 listed above is being caused by the icehouse branch during upgrades. The fact that a stable release was pushed at the same time things were wedged on the juno branch is just the latest evidence to me that things aren't being maintained as they should be. Looking at the #openstack-qa irc log from today or the etherpad about trying to sort this issue should be an indication that no one has stepped up to help with the maintenance and it shows given the poor state of the branch. Most specifically: "We originally conditioned the longer support window on extra people stepping forward to keep things working ... should be an indication that no one has stepped up to help with the maintenance and it shows given the poor state of the branch". I've been talking with a few people about this very thing lately, and I think much of it is caused by what appears to be our actively discouraging people from working on it. Most notably, ATC is only being given to folks committing to the current branch (https://ask.openstack.org/en/question/45531/atc-pass-for-the-openstack-summit/). Secondly, it's difficult to get stack-analytics credit for back ports, as the preferred method is to cherry pick the code, and that keeps the original author's name. I've personally gotten a few commits into stable, but have nothing to show for it in stack-analytics (if I'm doing it wrong, I'm happy to be corrected). My point here isn't to complain that I, or others, are not getting credit, but to point out that I don't know what we expected to happen to stable branches when we actively dis-incentivize people from working on them. Working on hardening old code is generally far less interesting than working on the cool shiny new features, and many of the productionalization issues we run into aren't uncovered until it's being run at scale which in turn is usually by a big company who likely isn't chasing trunk. My fear is that we're going in a direction where trunk is the sole focus and we're subsequently going to lose the support of the majority of the operators and enterprises at which point we'll be a fun research project, but little more. - - -- Kevin __________________________________________________________________________ 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 - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJU2i1eAAoJELUJLUWGN7CbmPEQAKV/9RPgKt6jwvq0bzhFCJPF hz2LOC8M5Fk1wINGUcvwGjiphCwGMSD9p6IYx7PAzMrnbhLqQa0exCmo4DUi3jdV qNC1A6juScrHjyQMcQ3dBS4Z4QEh0S964n2Ae/uoWydpDe8WGy4DQRLTNy+mCIg5 ROManHAWcQ3Cr5fYkFSeGQgaoROypj2Eebvv4kiYDPQVkjK1o49hpybxe5v0zR/Y 6kuacoZCK8h6X8b4CrbG+t/vCy8dqWIUB1j67VBojRDpe1p0yQqA3IJ72DLPfTw5 0GzUecfW781ZP5fHQSwhbg7t31UYXBpo9xszltXBiNynHRktA7BwYwj+YAFCKgNZ sQ/gZOruqR+Os8/+pngA23PCGvuCUsTamUCkQUs4mCHjdvPq/BNFg0qGNeeheLQq CzlldwqcPY5py3KfmipIZakH1wZ2S/DU/snuAhVatTjVHqO1leyk5asHYVVAnwCQ 96vawAHcIXEN4dPcXpcYBiiTE1mgq+0FQgVGsr4fQ2BkRYDN9rmOdVp+mG7b7QM0 jhK+POQqj+ojnQOKwA2ygQUglDY8MxjmfCrMukkWQylmYVb09Z0cOMFfMMw7YfU3 pWGP6BIfCManduqVBqFvTMxh/dCGIGq3LwrXo23qmukdgSIVRuj16XPZqXZ5xtv/ A6NV//pQXxvO4d+l4bBk =cT3X - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJU2i1jAAoJELUJLUWGN7CbsDIP/i0CyFC1FOL7SSC3IFLvVd9r sJw/AmH4e5oc0FwBlyF6PJa4vqhK3SYMRE1/mOUs/zpM8IRrMafkf83w2aSYrskw 5kYYYOyv702bmuKjnCK75Z6/DgzkdkbfhL1leLsEPNzjSlOHef139Bsy6SmAx9lO xqkiAP4QGdvtrEIfz9IWeUiPipYAocDa2oQkbtzsUB2B0eoI4yQY4euLxso7IpeI pZiw0mMdkARM6KHLIvg7o4mcqC4VmhcRLQQxnfgqH6xtRfWI7XbUuSPv5HIKLLP0 /EDRDTxdNoF9EC8TRz1LF9VEdjx1v4JrK0+WHtW6sTKKW47+QF79ogbaJKtyY7ry LaWrqbxdHsXvXftNv0muPQKUWfibSQqzhJLFeyLjhh3IW9AODllRj/oFfEqIYXl/ C103F65QkZqx2Njg0x+C88c/Md7gmrJtZQs+1+Sf5uNaj59NwLS0nPJaoqvZYiLp /T8IDgn1iJPk+J6pnmfOKC5Iafw2HxW95ymYnPHytW05uznZ1ZAcR8YZVhqQeteT j+eQj6pFzJxtCfPeQp+PgegSS1esMdMAHlUEpaqg/uh7fp0JT8KZtAk1hBqmf+kG 9NLfnIWMMtD3DjMS5ubUQJ40QU7dZsojcnn2Y76cTkHCLGw7IhxEtPUEQJpx0bb3 dX4GdnjTdXHFWZmo1O2j =jcPx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- __________________________________________________________________________ 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