← Back to team overview

nova team mailing list archive

Re: Dot releases?


On 13-10-2010 15:34, Rick Clark wrote:
>> In my dictionary, "dot releases" are "micro releases" that come
>> out in between "real releases". We have Austin coming out in a
>> couple of weeks, and Bexar is supposed to follow 3 months after
>> that. A "dot release" of Austin would be another release based on
>> Austin that adds some important bug fixes or similar that we find
>> as we move along (typically backported from later releases).
>> As an example of a project that does this, Ubuntu designates every
>>  fourth release a "Long Term Support" release. These releases get a
>>  number of dot releases in their lifetime (i.e. support timeframe).
>>  "Regular" Ubuntu releases don't get dot releases.
>> I don't think we'll want to follow that particular pattern.
> I would rather follow the pattern of KVM, that did not support or 
> backport patches until far down the line.

I agree completely. In fact, I totally stole the model outlined below
from KVM :)

>> Instead, I propose we stick to our three months' (or whatever
>> we'll end up with) cadence. With such frequent releases, the burden
>> of maintaining older releases significantly past their release
>> date doesn't seem worth while for us as a project. However, if
>> someone wants to maintain a stable branch of e.g. Austin, we let
>> them do so within the project. The support and maintenance burden
>> is primarily on them, but we provide the framework for them to do
>> so. We need to work out in detail how this will work, of course,
>> since their work will reflect upon the project as a whole.
> The basic reason for not supporting and backporting patches is that 
> the rate of change in the code is still high.

Again, agree completely. I had a paragraph to roughly the same effect in
my first draft of my e-mail :)

> Fixing bugs in old branches might be completely different work.  We 
> need to focus on moving the project forward, right now.

*nod* That's exactly why I don't think /we/ should be doing it.

> When we reach a point that the rate of change in the code has slowed
> and we are more feature complete we will come up with a full plan to
> support multiple releases.  Until then, we fix all bugs in trunk.

Right. I'm simply trying to acommodate the potential reality of a linux
distro coming along and wanting to ship a particular version of
Openstack and want to support it for a long time. I don't expect that to
happen in the (very) near future. Frankly, I think that would be silly.
Come Ubuntu's next LTS (expected in April 2012), it'll be an entirely
different story. Also way sooner than that.

Soren Hansen
OpenStack core developer

Follow ups