On 01/03/2014 08:52 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
While this would be an improvement over the current situation, IMO we
are focused a bit too much here on "operators" vs others. I think we
need clearer guidelines on what an "incompatible change" is, and how to
balance "change it to something better" with "don't cause users upgrade
pain". There was a similar issue with API changes a while back and
providing the api stability guidelines really helped people understand
the issue better. Of course, similar to what Sean talked about, having
API tests in tempest that blocked incompatible api changes was probably
even more important.
Tim Bell wrote:
Is there a mechanism to tag changes as being potentially more appropriate for
the more ops related profiles ? I'm thinking more when someone proposes a
change they suspect could have an operations impact, they could highlight this
as being one for particular focus.
How about an OpsImpact tag ?
I think such a tag would help. That would encourage ops to start looking
more regularly into proposed changes by highlighting the few reviews
that are most likely to need their expertise.
We could have that tag post reviews to the -operators ML (in the same
way SecurityImpact posts to the -security ML), which would additionally
reinforce the need for this list as a separate list from the openstack
OpenStack-dev mailing list