On Nov 22, 2012, at 1:47 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> wrote:
> Alan Pevec wrote: >> 2012/11/22 Lars Kellogg-Stedman <l...@seas.harvard.edu>: >>> Any chance we can get it fixed in Essex, too? Or has this release >>> been abandoned? I'm not clear on what the maintenance schedule looks >>> like as the steamroller of progress moves forward. >> >> Current stable branch policy is documented in >> http://wiki.openstack.org/StableBranch >> >> tld;r openstack-stable-maint team actively backports fixes to >> stable/folsom branch. >> Separate openstack-diablo-maint and openstack-essex-maint teams exist >> for older branches, but they accept serious issues e.g. security fixes >> only. >> Note that diablo/essex-maint teams are 1-2 members only, so if you >> have resources I'm sure they'd welcome any help they can get. > > It's more a question of how disruptive the patch is vs. how critical the > bug is. Given how annoying this bug is, it would be good to at least > assess the disruption factor of a backport. Backporting the whole refresh_cache would be very painful, but I think this could be done with a one line addition to update the cache at the end of network_api.allocate_for_instance which doesn't seem very disruptive. Vish _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp