)]}'
{"/PATCHSET_LEVEL":[{"author":{"_account_id":15343,"name":"Tim Burke","email":"tburke@nvidia.com","username":"tburke"},"change_message_id":"0808504fb8edee91ea96213bc847fa149662c12b","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":1,"id":"19e3722a_d5c56f69","updated":"2025-08-20 16:24:01.000000000","message":"Just sent [a note to the mailing list](https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/3CJPUXP5TVI2DMCSHONCDM44BFHCJXIZ/) regarding this; if we don\u0027t hear anything in... IDK, a week? let\u0027s drop \u0027em.","commit_id":"01639d3a01723e412f3528a9cc7161eb36932269"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"86607e8fea67492a0d2d76f393df57a8659fb1e8","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"95e40b88_eb1cad53","updated":"2025-08-21 08:59:53.000000000","message":"I understand if the team feels that this is a cumbersome burden but let me highlight that process of \"transitioning to Unmaintained\" was introduced exactly for the reason to highlight to consumers that project teams are not responsible to actively maintain these old branches anymore and leaving the maintenance burden to volunteers who keep the branches CI functional as much as possible and allow bugfix backports for them, so i\u0027d rather suggest to keep these branches open and let others to do the maintenance. And as an openstack-unmaintained-core group member i\u0027m stepping up to do the needful maintenance and I\u0027ll help others who want to backport bug fixes to these unmaintained branches, so I\u0027m adding -1 to this patch. (I\u0027ll send a mail with this to the mailing list as well)","commit_id":"f39777b1618970cae92f7097cda29c629d75477b"},{"author":{"_account_id":13252,"name":"Dr. Jens Harbott","display_name":"Jens Harbott (frickler)","email":"frickler@offenerstapel.de","username":"jrosenboom"},"change_message_id":"b417c0e55392ca9d55bfffa32d98c5a3901ace77","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"ee65c441_de1ce0ec","updated":"2025-08-22 16:03:08.000000000","message":"just let me note https://zuul.opendev.org/t/openstack/config-errors?project\u003dopenstack%2Fswift\u0026skip\u003d0 then","commit_id":"f39777b1618970cae92f7097cda29c629d75477b"},{"author":{"_account_id":13252,"name":"Dr. Jens Harbott","display_name":"Jens Harbott (frickler)","email":"frickler@offenerstapel.de","username":"jrosenboom"},"change_message_id":"6d0b67fad939288d4e48606cb6edeb9f7c8fc4fe","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"ed834bd7_dbbac102","updated":"2025-08-20 18:10:35.000000000","message":"lgtm, thanks. agree to wait a week for possible feedback","commit_id":"f39777b1618970cae92f7097cda29c629d75477b"},{"author":{"_account_id":13252,"name":"Dr. Jens Harbott","display_name":"Jens Harbott (frickler)","email":"frickler@offenerstapel.de","username":"jrosenboom"},"change_message_id":"ef82533be4c314e2057f75fd59d5cc645b36c23d","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"fa1a14ea_5bdd16ad","in_reply_to":"36635c4d_2fbf4570","updated":"2025-08-27 06:45:48.000000000","message":"Note that the current rules for unmaintained branches do no allow for holes to exist. If someone wants to keep victoria alive, they need to opt in to keeping all newer unmaintained branches alive as well. You can discuss modifying that policy with the TC if you want.\n\nAlso sadly the policy doesn\u0027t include any fixed rules on timing. The wording says that the CI must be \"in good shape\" at the time that the volunteering happens, but this hasn\u0027t factually been enforced so far.","commit_id":"f39777b1618970cae92f7097cda29c629d75477b"},{"author":{"_account_id":15343,"name":"Tim Burke","email":"tburke@nvidia.com","username":"tburke"},"change_message_id":"7ab5203da881c5a948e0a37099a040ceb153c037","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"36635c4d_2fbf4570","in_reply_to":"95e40b88_eb1cad53","updated":"2025-08-25 20:45:48.000000000","message":"\u003e And as an openstack-unmaintained-core group member I\u0027m stepping up to do the needful maintenance and I\u0027ll help others who want to backport bug fixes to these unmaintained branches\n\nFair enough -- and I appreciate your dedication. I definitely started out with an aggressive stance.\n\nFWIW, this came about as I realized that [when swift\u0027s master gate broke](https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-infra/%23openstack-infra.2025-08-19.log.html#openstack-infra.2025-08-19.log.html#t2025-08-19T14:35:21) recently, *every* stable and unmaintained branch surely broke, too. I\u0027ve now [fixed master](https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/swift/+/957959) as well as [2025.1](https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/swift/+/958002), and we remain committed to [fixing](https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/swift/+/958095) the [remaining](https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/swift/+/958095) stable branches. But it\u0027s not clear to me that you should feel compelled to fix the unmaintained branches.\n\nNow, part of why I feel that way has been Swift\u0027s approach over the years to dependency management, minimum required python versions, and backwards compatibility. We are loathe to drag forward minimum versions of our dependencies -- the most recent of which is eventlet 0.25.0, released in mid-2019. We wait as long as possible to drop old versions of python -- until all known, engaged operators have either gotten off the old version or expressed that they don\u0027t intend to upgrading Swift until they\u0027ve upgraded Python (and probably OS). We\u0027ve consistently held ourselves to a high standard such that (nearly) regardless of what versions of any other software you might have running, we can recommend upgrading to latest Swift with high confidence.\n\nSo after I noticed that [watcher eol\u0027ed roughly the same set of branches](https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/935983), this seemed like a reasonable first take.\n\nWhat do you think of limiting this to victoria through zed, like watcher? Or is the trouble that Swift still needs to be around and open for other projects to be able to run *their* unmaintained CI?\n\nMaybe just victoria, wallaby, and xena? There are existing patches against victoria and xena with broken CI and no one looking to help -- how long do we continue waiting for someone to show up to fix them?","commit_id":"f39777b1618970cae92f7097cda29c629d75477b"},{"author":{"_account_id":17685,"name":"Elod Illes","email":"elod.illes@est.tech","username":"elod.illes"},"change_message_id":"87172bb6a1b93c150cf144dbb2f0ca895d2f6efc","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"aebaa7ad_4b82f7f3","in_reply_to":"db30b5a3_a2e0b792","updated":"2025-12-19 17:58:37.000000000","message":"sorry for not coming back here earlier :S meanwhile, the gates were fixed for most of the unmaintained/* branches of swift, and what you suggested (to EOL victoria, wallaby and xena) is just happened [1][2] for rest of the open core projects of openstack. I still opting in to do maintenance for the rest of the open branches (as long as feasible). Some signaled slight interest about keeping yoga open, so let\u0027s keep it as long as it is possible.\n\n[1] https://lists.openstack.org/archives/list/openstack-discuss@lists.openstack.org/thread/N24CYAJMLVJMAJMUE4RA5U7KOL7LABOW/\n[2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/970624","commit_id":"f39777b1618970cae92f7097cda29c629d75477b"},{"author":{"_account_id":15343,"name":"Tim Burke","email":"tburke@nvidia.com","username":"tburke"},"change_message_id":"7ab5203da881c5a948e0a37099a040ceb153c037","unresolved":false,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"50709d15_40752359","in_reply_to":"ee65c441_de1ce0ec","updated":"2025-08-25 20:45:48.000000000","message":"And that\u0027s only going to get worse as we [phase out support for bionic](https://meetings.opendev.org/irclogs/%23openstack-infra/%23openstack-infra.2025-08-19.log.html#openstack-infra.2025-08-19.log.html#t2025-08-19T14:55:58).","commit_id":"f39777b1618970cae92f7097cda29c629d75477b"},{"author":{"_account_id":15343,"name":"Tim Burke","email":"tburke@nvidia.com","username":"tburke"},"change_message_id":"36c67bb1c904d03764ab998a73d474ebc107be13","unresolved":true,"context_lines":[],"source_content_type":"","patch_set":2,"id":"db30b5a3_a2e0b792","in_reply_to":"fa1a14ea_5bdd16ad","updated":"2025-08-27 15:48:39.000000000","message":"Sorry, my wording may have caused some confusion: by \"limiting this\" I meant limiting the scope of this change -- i.e., the set of unmaintained branches to EOL. So, leave unmaintained/2024.1 (and possibly unmaintained/zed and unmaintained/yoga) alone. I agree, there should be no holes.","commit_id":"f39777b1618970cae92f7097cda29c629d75477b"}]}