On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 13:26:48 -0500, Eric Fried wrote:
I think the only concern around moving spec freeze out would be that I
thought the original purpose of the spec freeze was to set expectations
early about what was approved and not approved instead of having folks
potentially in the situation where it's technically "maybe" for a large
chunk of the cycle. I'm not sure which most people prefer -- would you
rather know early and definitively whether your blueprint is
approved/not approved or would you rather have the opportunity to get
approval during a larger window in the cycle and not know definitively
early on? Can anyone else chime in here?
This is a fair point.
Putting specs into runways doesn't imply (re)moving spec freeze IMO.
It's just a way to get us using runways RIGHT NOW, so that folks with
ready specs can get reviewed sooner, know whether they're approved
sooner, write their code sooner, and get their *code* into an earlier
runway.
A spec in a runway would be treated like anything else: reviewers focus
on it and the author needs to be available to respond quickly to feedback.
I would expect the ratio of specs:code in runways to start off high and
dwindle rapidly as we approach spec freeze.
This would seem to have the same effect as waiting until after spec
freeze to start using runways for focusing on reviews of
implementations. And (MHO) I'm not sure we need help in reviewing more
specs. While it's true that not a lot of people review specs, we do
still also repeatedly approve more specs than we can complete in a
cycle, every cycle.
I'd rather keep things simpler and not add spec reviews into the mix at
this time.
Maybe a good compromise would be to start runways now and move spec
freeze out to r-2 (Jun 7). That way we have less pressure on spec review
earlier on, more time to review the current queue of approved
implementations via runways, and a chance to approve more specs along
the way if we find we're flushing the queue down enough.
What does everyone think about that?
It's worth pointing out that there's not an expectation for people to
work more/harder when runways are in play. Just that it increases the
chances of more people looking at the same things at the same time; and
allows us to bring focus to things that might otherwise languish in
ignoreland.
Yes, this. The goal IMHO is to make an improvement over what we usually
do, which is having our review efforts scattered across various approved
implementations. If we could focus a bit and increase the chances that
we're reviewing the same things at the same time, I think we might have
a better completion percentage on approved blueprints in the cycle.
-melanie
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
