openstack team mailing list archive

[Thierry Carrez <thierry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Paul Voccio wrote:
> I missed this thread yesterday and I saw Nachi's patches last night and I
> +1'ed them. I had my filters setup wrong and I thought I was looking at
> master, but I see now that they were for backport instead. I agree that we
> should get these in trunk but I get his hesitation about having to wait
> for these to go in to trunk then someone has to then backport this to
> Diablo. Since the patches are small could we propose these to both
> branches? I think they would apply cleanly but I haven't verified this
> yet. If he could propose to both branches we could push these fixes
> through quickly. 

They could be proposed to both branches... but should only be accepted
in stable/diablo once they pass trunk, otherwise you end up duplicating
work.

Trunk belongs to $PROJECT-core: the reviewers ensure that the patch is
good enough to belong in $PROJECT code.

stable/diablo belongs to the stable maintainers group. The
stable-maintainers group ensures that the patch made it past
$PROJECT-core into trunk, and then checks if it is appropriate for
stable/diablo (not a new feature, not a disrupting bugfix). It should
*not* be reviewed by $PROJECT-core, otherwise you end up duplicating
review effort, which is clearly not what you want to do. The stable
maintainers group review must therefore come *in addition to* the
corresponding core review made for trunk.

I don't know if Gerrit can tell the difference, but -core is not
responsible for stable/diablo.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Release Manager, OpenStack