[Pulp-dev] Allowing Older Z-stream Backports and Releases?

[Tatiana Tereshchenko]

Backport tracker has been created.
Docs about how to file a backport request can be found here
https://docs.pulpproject.org/en/master/nightly/bugs-features.html#for-backport-requests

Tanya

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 12:11 PM Ina Panova <ipanova at redhat.com> wrote:

> To follow up on this, during the open floor it has been decided to create
> a Backport tracker to facilitate backport requests, in addition some docs
> are being written so people have guidelines.
>
> --------
> Regards,
>
> Ina Panova
> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>
> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 7:10 PM Brian Bouterse <bmbouter at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Currently my understanding of the z-stream policy is that Pulp only has
>> one active z-stream. This means (for example) that when 3.6.0 comes out,
>> there will never be another z-stream release for 3.5.z, 3.4.z, 3.3.z, etc.
>>
>> I believe we have an opportunity to create more value by adjusting this
>> to allow for older z-stream releases to be requested as-needed. This would
>> allow for example Katello's use of pulpcore 3.4.1 to request a 3.4.2 to be
>> created even if 3.6.0 is released. Similarly for any plugin. These could
>> only contain bugfixes (never features) due to semantic versioning
>> restriction.
>>
>> This is based on feedback I've gotten from various users including
>> Katello, and this would allow them to use a version of pulpcore or a plugin
>> and receive stability fixes without being forced to upgrade. Then they can
>> upgrade when is right for them (not for us).
>>
>> If others agree with this change I think we need to figure out the
>> following:
>>
>> * How can a user request a backport? [bmbouter suggests using a new
>> tracker type in Redmine named 'Backport']
>> * How can mini-teams perform backporting? [bmbouter suggests manual
>> cherry-picking and releasing as-needed, only with requested items]
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Brian
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20200805/29239916/attachment.htm>