On 10/24/13 at 11:07am, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 10/24/2013 10:52 AM, Gary Kotton wrote:
On 10/24/13 4:46 PM, "Dan Smith" <d...@danplanet.com> wrote:
In the last meeting we discussed an idea that I think is worth trying at
least for icehouse-1 to see if we like it or not. The idea is that
*every* blueprint starts out at a Low priority, which means "best
effort, but no promises". For a blueprint to get prioritized higher, it
should have 2 nova-core members signed up to review the resulting code.
Huge +1 to this. I'm in favor of the whole plan, but specifically the
prioritization piece is very important, IMHO.
I too am in favor of the idea. It is just not clear how 2 Nova cores will
be signed up.
Good point, there was no detail on that. I propose just comments on the
blueprint whiteboard. It can be something simple like this to indicate
that Dan and I have agreed to review the code for something:
"nova-core reviewers: russellb, dansmith"
+1 to everything in Russells original email. But for this point
specifically I see it as resulting from conversations amongst Nova
developers. If some of us decide that a blueprint is important or very
nice to have then we should sign up to help it through. But there's
nothing wrong with a low priority blueprint. We may want to communicate
that core members don't need to be hunted and recruited for absolutely
every blueprint that's proposed.
--
Russell Bryant
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
