On 20 November 2013 10:21, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> wrote: > Russell Bryant wrote: >> One of the bits of feedback that came from the "Nova Project Structure >> and Process" session at the design summit was that it would be nice to >> skip having blueprints for smaller items. >> >> In an effort to capture this, I updated the blueprint review criteria >> [1] with the following: >> >> Some blueprints are closed as unnecessary. Blueprints are used for >> tracking significant development efforts. In general, small and/or >> straight forward cleanups do not need blueprints. A blueprint should >> be filed if: >> >> - it impacts the release notes >> - it covers significant internal development or refactoring efforts >> [...] > > While I agree we should not *require* blueprints for minor > features/efforts, should we actively prevent people from filing them (or > close them if they are filed ?) > > Personally (I know I'm odd) I like to have my work (usually small stuff) > covered by a blueprint so that I can track and communicate its current > completion status -- helps me keep track of where I am. > > So the question is... is there a cost associated with tolerating "small" > blueprints ? Once they are set to "Low" priority they mostly disappear > from release management tracking so it's not really a burden there.
Approving a small number of smaller blueprints seems OK to me. But maybe a bug could be a lower cost alternative. But too many blueprints is certainly its a happier place than not having detailed enough blueprints for the code that needs them. Maybe we should soften the language to describe when we don't _require_ a blueprint. John _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev