openstack team mailing list archive

[Mark McLoughlin <markmc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi James,

On Fri, 2011-11-11 at 07:03 +0000, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> 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 :)

Could you go ahead and make this change?

Thanks much,
Mark.