Walter A. Boring IV <walter.bor...@hpe.com> wrote:
On 08/08/2016 02:28 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote:
Duncan Thomas <duncan.tho...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 August 2016 at 21:12, Matthew Treinish <mtrein...@kortar.org> wrote:
Ignoring all that, this is also contrary to how we perform testing in
OpenStack.
We don't turn off entire classes of testing we have so we can land
patches,
that's just a recipe for disaster.
But is it more of a disaster (for the consumers) than zero testing,
zero review, scattered around the internet
if-you're-lucky-with-a-good-wind you'll maybe get the right patch set?
Because that's where we are right now, and vendors, distributors and
the cinder core team are all saying it's a disaster.
If consumers rely on upstream releases, then they are expected to
migrate to newer releases after EOL, not switch to a random branch on
the internet. If they rely on some commercial product, then they usually
have an extended period of support and certification for their drivers,
so it’s not a problem for them.
Ihar
This is entirely unrealistic. Force customers to upgrade. Good luck
explaining to a bank that in order to get their cinder driver fix in,
they have to upgrade their entire OpenStack deployment. Real world
customers simply will balk at this all day long.
Real world customers will pay for engineering to support their software,
either their own or of one of OpenStack vendors. There is no free lunch
from upstream here.
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