Hi all,
there is contradictory info about what we do with kilo now that it’s not
the latest stable release.
- An old email thread [1] suggested that the branch can still receive all
kinds of bug fixes as long as corresponding project teams want to spend
time on it: "expanding the support scope for N-1 stable branch is fine if
we can deliver it”; "IIRC "current stable release" was originally defined
by markmc as the branch where stable-maint team proactively proposes
backports by monitoring the trunk, but we have lost that mode long ago,
backports are now done retroactively after bugs are reported.”
- Releases page on wiki [2] calls the branch ‘Security-supported’ (and it’s
not clear what it implies)
- StableBranch page though requires that we don’t merge non-critical bug
fixes there: "Only critical bugfixes and security patches are acceptable”
Some projects may want to continue backporting reasonable (even though
non-critical) fixes to older stable branches. F.e. in neutron, I think
there is will to continue providing backports for the branch.
I wonder though whether we would not break some global openstack rules by
continuing with those backports. Are projects actually limited about what
types of bug fixes are supposed to go in stable branches, or we embrace
different models of stable maintenance and allow for some freedom per
project?
[1]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-stable-maint/2014-July/002404.html
[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Releases
[3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StableBranch#Support_phases
Ihar
__________________________________________________________________________
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
