Re: [Openstack] Keystone's stable/diablo branch

2011-11-13 Thread Mark McLoughlin 
Hi Dolph,

On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 13:58 -0600, Dolph Mathews wrote:
 Keystone needs your help testing!
 
 The goal of this branch is to be completely compatible with diablo,
 while including as many improvements as possible. Pending your
 satisfaction, we'd like to tag this branch in the coming days.

Awesome!

We still have a problem with versioning, though.

  - Essex keystone will be 2012.1

  - Diablo keystone was tagged as 2011.3

  - Diablo keystone was actually versioned as 1.0 (see setup.py) even 
though version() returns 0.9

  - stable/diablo is now versioned as 0.9.1 - i.e. behind the diablo 
version number!

I think we should just adopt the .N versioning on stable/diablo, but
this will be the first time we've released from a stable branch. How
does 2011.3.1 sound?

(Thanks to Alan cc-ed for noticing this)

Cheers,
Mark.


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Openstack] Stable branch reviews

2011-11-13 Thread Mark McLoughlin 
On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 08:57 -0800, James E. Blair wrote:
 Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com writes:
 
  On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 12:11 +0400, Yuriy Taraday wrote:
  I wonder if we should keep Change ID consistent in stable and master
  branches so that if one merged something into master, reviewers
  and archaeologists can easily find both related changes in master and all
  backports of specific change.
  
  The simple scenario is: push change into master, then cherry-pick it on top
  of stable branch(es). Change-Id will be the same, Gerrit will allow one to
  find all such backports by clicking on Change-Id.
 
  If gerrit can handle it, that would be great. But I'm not sure it does
 
 It does work as Yuriy described, and seems to be in keeping with gerrit
 philosophy.  Maybe we should update the wiki to incorporate that.
 
 Here's an example: 
 
 https://review-dev.openstack.org/#q,I1729eb6fb7027808650bae9a87b2d95cc5c5a0f7,n,z

Cool, I'll update the wiki.

  In the mean time, we make sure that all commits to the stable branch
  include cherry picked from X in the commit message to help
  tracking.
 
  Also, I'm experimenting with using git-notes to keep track of e.g. why
  patches on master weren't cherry-picked into stable:
 
http://wiki.openstack.org/StableBranch#Keeping_Notes
 
 Why not (also) leave review comments to that effect in gerrit?  If you
 started them out with something like Reviewed for stable inclusion,
 they'd be easy to spot when scanning the collapsed comments.

Well, what I want to do is occasionally go over all the commits that
have been made on master since the last time I reviewed them. And I
don't really want to have to go to gerrit for every single commit on
master to add comments.

Cheers,
Mark.


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp