)]}'
{"deliverables/wallaby/ironic-python-agent-builder.yaml":[{"author":{"_account_id":11655,"name":"Julia Kreger","email":"juliaashleykreger@gmail.com","username":"jkreger","status":"Flying to the moon with a Jetpack!"},"change_message_id":"ce5fba7cd027efc5b147bdb8e856f8afe6eae088","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":14,"context_line":"        hash: 1355d790ef5e3c5e6620bf07ea7f34480474949b"},{"line_number":15,"context_line":"branches:"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"  - name: stable/wallaby"},{"line_number":17,"context_line":"    location: 2.7.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"2b009b57_f91c4442","line":17,"updated":"2021-05-04 16:05:32.000000000","message":"I don\u0027t think this (as in creating this file) needs to be done here. There is still the file at deliverables/_independent/ironic-python-agent-builder.yaml where the branch can be created as is for now, and we can officially have it listed on the deliverable reporting and pretty webpages starting in Xena. I guess it is an understatement, we don\u0027t care about the webpages as much as putting in a wallaby stable branch and moving forward.\n\nThis is also potentially an artificial version bump which is misleading post release, but I\u0027ve not gone back and looked at where the branch presently is at. If Riccardo says that version is good, then so be it.","commit_id":"e65682caa4592dd105c319d461bc6bd4a0f0eaea"},{"author":{"_account_id":28522,"name":"Hervé Beraud","email":"herveberaud.pro@gmail.com","username":"hberaud"},"change_message_id":"6d2f9170842e58ec46e51c14cabd1424e91d0726","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":14,"context_line":"        hash: 1355d790ef5e3c5e6620bf07ea7f34480474949b"},{"line_number":15,"context_line":"branches:"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"  - name: stable/wallaby"},{"line_number":17,"context_line":"    location: 2.7.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"40f3412f_4d643880","line":17,"in_reply_to":"2b009b57_f91c4442","updated":"2021-05-04 19:27:06.000000000","message":"Hello Julia,\n\nFirst thanks for your comment.\n\nConcerning myself here is my point of view.\n\nI\u0027m not fan to create a branch for Wallaby from the independent file, for the sake of clarity and to avoid misleanding I really prefer to officiallize the Wallaby part by using this file, I\u0027m ok to switch the release model and I\u0027m ok to add deliverable to a stable series, however, I want to keep things clear and understandable as much as possible. I\u0027m not fan to artificialize Wallaby deliverables (and Wallaby branches) by using the independent model and its deliverables.\n\nUnfortunatelly creating this file isn\u0027t about webpage, its mostly about considering the extended maintainance and EOL phases as soon as possible in this process. Indeed with this file we have no chance to miss this deliverable 18 months later and we reduce the risk introduce inconsistences in few months. In 18 months the release management team\u0027s members will surely not the same and as much as possible I don\u0027t want to leave inconsistences to future generations, especially if they can be avoided from the beginig. Each inconsistence on series mean gates issues, jobs to reenqueue for the infra team, doing speleology session in the history etc... that\u0027s time consuming and painful too...\n\nWith this file if new version are needed for wallaby we directly know where to refer for these ones. If I correctly understood you often face issues with stable branches, so, refering to this file will allow to produce specific versions and tags, and even allow you to deal with EM and EOL when the time is right.\n\nThe independent file mostly remain for the sake of history.\n\nFollowing one series mean embrass its full life cycle. \n\nWithout that we will surely face inconsistences  at a moment or another (tagging EM and EOL by example, or again, EOL branches removing by example).\n\nConcerning the version number we can\u0027t start a new series with a bugfix version, in other words a minor version is required at least. Also I think that a related tag is needed to avoid inconsistences for Wallaby and observe when the model have been switched back.\n\nLet\u0027s wait for other release team member their thinking about this.\n\nThis is draft to allow to move further about this topic, I\u0027m ok to produce new patch sets if needed.","commit_id":"e65682caa4592dd105c319d461bc6bd4a0f0eaea"},{"author":{"_account_id":23851,"name":"Riccardo Pittau","email":"elfosardo@gmail.com","username":"elfosardo"},"change_message_id":"db3f377fd4652e5908ddd3eca78de9a90bdac274","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":14,"context_line":"        hash: 1355d790ef5e3c5e6620bf07ea7f34480474949b"},{"line_number":15,"context_line":"branches:"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"  - name: stable/wallaby"},{"line_number":17,"context_line":"    location: 2.7.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"b99e9da4_fc832ec1","line":17,"in_reply_to":"40f3412f_4d643880","updated":"2021-05-05 08:55:45.000000000","message":"Hey Hervé,\nI pretty much have the same concerns as Julia, but it seems clear that we don\u0027t have a lot of options on how to deal with this, your words make sense.\nI was just wondering if we could point the wallaby branch to release 2.6.0 instead https://github.com/openstack/ironic-python-agent-builder/releases/tag/2.6.0\nIt\u0027s the latest release of ipa-builder and it\u0027s at a good point in history to cut a stable branch, also not that far in terms of commits (3 from latest change).\nNot sure how \"illegal\" that is :)\nI\u0027ll also wait for other release team members to chip in\nThanks again for your help","commit_id":"e65682caa4592dd105c319d461bc6bd4a0f0eaea"},{"author":{"_account_id":23851,"name":"Riccardo Pittau","email":"elfosardo@gmail.com","username":"elfosardo"},"change_message_id":"cb8dfaf7e16a99e5c3502f6d77083f00354171a0","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":14,"context_line":"        hash: 1355d790ef5e3c5e6620bf07ea7f34480474949b"},{"line_number":15,"context_line":"branches:"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"  - name: stable/wallaby"},{"line_number":17,"context_line":"    location: 2.7.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"2dd71bdd_ce1fb061","line":17,"in_reply_to":"559e801b_6b227423","updated":"2021-05-06 09:38:46.000000000","message":"Thanks Hervé, all clear from my side.\nI\u0027m good with this change.","commit_id":"e65682caa4592dd105c319d461bc6bd4a0f0eaea"},{"author":{"_account_id":28522,"name":"Hervé Beraud","email":"herveberaud.pro@gmail.com","username":"hberaud"},"change_message_id":"3c1dc7c1499f0e0a06f0dced7a6a299c0782e3ca","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[{"line_number":14,"context_line":"        hash: 1355d790ef5e3c5e6620bf07ea7f34480474949b"},{"line_number":15,"context_line":"branches:"},{"line_number":16,"context_line":"  - name: stable/wallaby"},{"line_number":17,"context_line":"    location: 2.7.0"}],"source_content_type":"text/x-yaml","patch_set":2,"id":"559e801b_6b227423","line":17,"in_reply_to":"b99e9da4_fc832ec1","updated":"2021-05-05 13:12:45.000000000","message":"Hello Riccardo,\n\nYou\u0027re welcome.\n\nBranching from an existing tag isn\u0027t an issue, branches can be created from where we want.\n\nConcerning the tag, the problem isn\u0027t if it is illegal or not, the problem is more to know when it will fail with our tooling and our standardization.\n\nAFAIk we never encountered similar use case (at least which I witnessed).\n\nI dove more deeply in our previous series (wallaby, victoria, ussuri, train, stein, rocky) and I could\u0027t found deliverables that hadn\u0027t been released during a cycle and that had been branched for this cycle.\n\nBy declaring a new version I\u0027m more or less sure that things are aligned with the other deliverables and that our machinery will work without too problems.\n\nMaybe the shortest path is simply to recreate a tag at the same point that 2.6.0 to explicit cut it for Wallaby. AFAIK that isn\u0027t an issue to create a tag from the SHA and to base the wallaby branch on this point. Things will be explicit, all pieces will be there, you will get what you need and what you want and our tooling/process will be happy.\n\nThe reason behind the new tag is that we need to consider that a series should start with a minor version at least, so if you want to release fixes in few months then a minor version will be mandatory. A bugfix version won\u0027t be allowed. As Julia said in is previous comment, this kind of version bump will be misleading post release. Indeed it will be a minor version with only bugfixes inside (potentially). The version number will not reflect changes landed, which is misleading.\n\nCreating a new tag from the same SHA used by 2.6.0 will make that point explicit, won\u0027t be a misleading post release, will solve the first minor version need, will allow to properly bump your next bugfix versions if needed.\n\nI\u0027m gonna go to update the SHA that we use here.\n\nHopefully that these elements will answer your questions and fit your needs.\n\nIf you need more details or help do not hesitate to ask more questions we will be happy to help you.","commit_id":"e65682caa4592dd105c319d461bc6bd4a0f0eaea"}]}