launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[John Arbash Meinel <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 4/4/2011 6:49 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
> We've merged rev 10381 (the highest qa'd revision) of db-stable to
> devel and its wending its way through buildbot now.
> 
> There were two revisions - a publisher change and comment hiding for
> questions - that were in db-stable but not qa'd. They have *not* been
> included.
> 
> However, as neither contain DB changes, they can both be landed again
> on devel once we qa past the db-stable merge; and then qa'd etc and
> deployed subsequent to the complete downtime deploy.
> 
> As part of making the downtime more reliable we're going to make the
> db downtime be precisely that: we'll deploy the db changing revision
> *only* during the downtime window, and do a regular nodowntime deploy
> subsequent to that. If you are changing a service which isn't part of
> the nodowntime set, it either needs to go only through db-devel, or
> organise a *partial downtime* window for it via mrevell. My strong
> preference is *partial downtime* because the DB downtime deploys are
> the single most risky event we have: making that go really well is
> crucial for decreasing the duration of complete downtime.
> 
> Cheers,
> Rob
> 
> https://dev.launchpad.net/Downtime for the definitions of complete and
> partial downtime.

Should it still say that we only do scheduled complete downtime once a
month?  I know you scheduled downtime just a bit ago, but I don't know
whether that was partial or complete.

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk2ZXQgACgkQJdeBCYSNAAOuHQCdH0/VF0ZJK2a1TXlW9GtOPJ8m
YG4AoLqnqYclOx0OO93W0ee2xnkiLo4D
=JuP+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----