openstack team mailing list archive

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2011-11-10 at 08:02 -0800, James E. Blair wrote:
> Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Only folks that understand the stable branch policy[1] should be 
> > allowed to +2 on the stable branch.
> >
> > Basically, a stable branch reviewer should only +2 if:
> >
> >   - It fixes a significant issue, seen, or potentially seen, by someone
> >     during real life use
> >
> >   - The fix, or equivalent, must be in master already
> >
> >   - The fix was either a fairly trivial cherry-pick that looks 
> >     equally correct for the stable branch, or that the fix has 
> >     sufficient technical review (e.g. a +1 from another stable 
> >     reviewer if it's fairly straightforward, or one or more +1s from 
> >     folks on core it it's really gnarly)
> >
> >   - If this reviewer proposed the patch originally, another stable
> >     branch reviewer should have +1ed it 
> >
> > All we need is an understanding of the policy and reasonable judgement,
> > it's not rocket science. I'd encourage folks to apply to the team for
> > membership after reviewing a few patches.
> 
> It sounds like the best way to implement this policy is to give
> openstack-stable-maint exclusive approval authority on stable branches,
> and then make sure people understand those rules when adding them to
> that team.  If that's the consensus, I can make the change.

Yes, that's what Thierry initially suggested and I'm persuaded now
too :)

Cheers,
Mark.