[all][release] One following-cycle release model to bind them all
Mark Goddard wrote:
> One substantial change here is that there will no longer be a period
> where the stable branch exists but the coordinated release does not.
> This could be an issue for cycle trailing projects such as kolla which
> sometimes get blocked on external (and internal) factors. Currently we
> are able to revert master from it's temporary stable mode to start
> development for the next cycle, while we continue stabilising the stable
> branch for release.
Making sure I understand... Currently you are using RC1 to create the
stable branch, but it's not really a "release candidate", it's more a
starting point for stabilization ? So you can have a broken master
branch, tag it RC1 and create stable/ussuri from it, then work on making
stable/ussuri releasable while keeping master broken ?
If I understand correctly, then it's a fair point: the new model
actually makes release candidates real release candidates, so it does
not really support having a master branch that never gets close to
releasable state. I would argue that this was not really the intent
before with RC1 tags, but it certainly made it easier to hide.
To support your case more clearly, maybe we could allow creating stable
branches from arbitrary commit SHAs. It used to be the case before (when
stable branches were created by humans) but when automation took over we
enforced that branches need to be created from tags.
I'll check with the release team where that requirement came from, and
if we can safely relax it.
Thierry Carrez (ttx)