Micro release Exception for Nova, Swift, Glance, and Keystone

Clint Byrum clint at ubuntu.com
Sun May 6 19:12:37 UTC 2012

Excerpts from Martin Pitt's message of Sat May 05 12:52:34 -0700 2012:
> Hello,
> Martin Pitt [2011-12-20  9:19 +0100]:
> > FTR, I accepted "nova" into oneiric-proposed yesterday, to unblock
> > this and use this as a real-world example how this works, and what we
> > need to improve.
> > [...]
> > In general I'm in favor of a MRE here given how closely upstream
> > supports us, but I'd like to see the runtime testing question resolved
> > first, and see how the current nova SRU goes.
> The current SRU has been in -proposed for 5 months now, without any
> feedback about formal testing, and has been supeseded by a security
> update months ago as well. So based on this I think we'll need a few
> more trial runs before I agree to a general microrelease exception.

I'm not so sure I agree that there has been no feedback.

The nova SRU fixed *38* bugs. Our usual SRU verification process is
mostly cumbersome red tape compared to the review process that the stable
updates team for OpenStack used to get these fixes in. 8 of the 38 bugs
were verified.

The lack of participation in the SRU process shouldn't be seen as an
indication that people are not interested in updated OpenStack, but
rather that people aren't interested in re-verifying the bugs they've
already verified during the normal update process they use upstream.

The whole point of these types of exceptions is that we get more fixes
shipped to users when an upstream project takes sufficient steps to
reduce regression potential. OpenStack has a fantastic process in place
for that, and I think we should feel comfortable trusting that process
given the amount of influence Ubuntu developers had in creating it and
continue to have in maintaining it.

More information about the technical-board mailing list