openstack team mailing list archive

[Nachi Ueno <ueno.nachi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi folks

Thank you for your help > Mark and Jay and Reviewers
I removed all review request for diablo/stable from Gerrit.
And, We will follow community policy.

Current our test code and bug fix is based on stable/diablo.
For each branch. "forward-porting" is needed.

12 bug patch branch is in progress ( they are almost done)
34 bug patch branch is on github(*)
30 test code branch is on github.
(*)https://github.com/ntt-pf-lab/nova/branches

>From next work alter these branches, We will follow the policy (Essex first).

However, for now, we have not enough man-power.
So please help us.
I wrote a script which shows bug description and conflict files and
merge command.
(See https://gist.github.com/1355816)

Each branch is linked to bug report.

If you guys help forward-porting work, would you please assign the bug
for yourself.
(Thanks Jay!)

Naming rule in our repository is like this.
https://github.com/ntt-pf-lab/nova/tree/openstack-qa-nova-(bugID)

For now, There are bugs which is not fixed yet, so test code fails.
So I think we should start from bug fix.

Cheers
Nati

2011/11/10 Jay Pipes <jaypipes@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Wed, 2011-11-09 at 14:57 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>> Soren Hansen wrote:
>> > 2011/11/9 Nachi Ueno <ueno.nachi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> >> I understand your point. Stop QAing stable/diablo and focus on Essex.
>> >
>> > Oh, no no. That's not the point. I'm thrilled to have you work on
>> > QAing Diablo. The only issue is that the fixes you come up with should
>> > be pushed to Essex first. There are two reasons for this:
>> >
>> >  * If we don't push the fixes to Essex, the problems will still be
>> > present in Essex and every release after that.
>> >
>> >  * Having them in Essex lets us try them out, vet them and validate
>> > them more thoroughly before we let them into the stable branch. When a
>> > patch lands in the stable branch it has to be well tested already
>> > (unless of course Essex has deviated too much, in which case we'll
>> > have to accept the risk of getting it into Diablo directly).
>>
>> +1
>>
>> You should submit patches to master and then backport them to
>> stable/diablo, rather than proposing them for stable/diablo directly.
>> That ensures your work benefits both branches: making diablo better
>> without making essex worse than diablo.
>>
>> If that's just too much work, maybe you should raise the issue at the
>> next QA meeting to try to get some outside help ?
>
> At the QA meeting yesterday, I offered my help to Nati. I will handle
> proposing his patches to Essex up to a future date where Nati and his
> team will switch to code against Essex, not Diablo/stable and propose
> first to master, then others will backport to diablo/stable.
>
> Nati and I will decide on that future date for his team to switch their
> focus to Essex trunk and not have to have someone manually
> "forward-port" these patches to trunk.
>
> Cheers,
> -jay
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>