On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 10:30:59AM -0800, Joe Gordon wrote: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 02:00:11PM -0800, Joe Gordon wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui < > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > This is something we can call nitpiking or low priority. > > > > > > > > > > This all seems like nitpicking for very little value. I think there are > > > better things we can be focusing on instead of thinking of new ways to > > nit > > > pick. So I am -1 on all of these. > > > > Yes as written this is low priority but something necessary for a > > project like Nova it is. > > > > > Why do you think this is necessary?
Your asking make sense; You/Nova is looking for engineering time to focus on other development more importants. I would to help with my humble experience. * Let developer a chance to know about what values was expected when he broke a test. * Let developer to know what to use between warn or warning instead of loosing time by looking in the module what was used or doing a coin flip. Contributors are expected to read HACKING.rst and some of these rules can be tested by gate. > > Considered that I feel sad to take your time. Can I suggest you to > > take no notice of this and let's others developers working on Nova too > > do this job ? > > > > > As the maintainer of openstack-dev/hacking and as a nova core, I don't > think this is worth doing at all. Nova already has enough on its plate and > doesn't need extra code to review. My point was not to discredit your opinion (My phrasing can be wrong I'm non-native english) I believe that you and contributors in general like me are working to make Nova better. Usually in opensource software contributors are welcome to help even if it is to fix a typo and I was hoped to help. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
