On 9/17/2015 7:23 AM, Tony Breeds wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 06:22:47AM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Tony,
Looks like the ban is holding up:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224429/
Sorry yes. Robert Collins pointed out that my new quicker plan wasn't going to
work so we went back to the original ban 1.4.1 solution.
It looks like the gate is mostly green again.
If people have grenade jobs that failed, a recheck shoudl fix that.
Thanks to all those that pushed on this to get things going again.
Yours Tony.
__________________________________________________________________________
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
As noted in the stable/kilo block on 1.4.1, we're good until we do a
1.4.2 release at which point we either break juno or we break kilo since
they overlap in supported version ranges.
I've asked Tony to push a requirements change on stable/juno and
stable/kilo to add a note next to oslo.utils reminding us of this so we
think twice before breaking it again (we should really make this part of
the openstack/releases review process - to check that the proposed
version change isn't going to show up in a branch that we don't intend
it do). Because if the proposed release has a g-r sync for branch n and
the version will show up in branch n-1 or n+1, things will likely break.
Hopefully we just don't need an oslo.utils release on juno or kilo
before juno-eol happens.
--
Thanks,
Matt Riedemann
__________________________________________________________________________
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
