+1, we also need some work to clean existing blueprints which are not approved. I think that is responsibility for drafter of those blueprints to follow new process.
2014-03-07 2:05 GMT+08:00 Sean Dague <s...@dague.net>: > One of the issues that the Nova team has definitely hit is Blueprint > overload. At some point there were over 150 blueprints. Many of them > were a single sentence. > > The results of this have been that design review today is typically not > happening on Blueprint approval, but is instead happening once the code > shows up in the code review. So -1s and -2s on code review are a mix of > design and code review. A big part of which is that design was never in > any way sufficiently reviewed before the code started. > > In today's Nova meeting a new thought occurred. We already have Gerrit > which is good for reviewing things. It gives you detailed commenting > abilities, voting, and history. Instead of attempting (and usually > failing) on doing blueprint review in launchpad (or launchpad + an > etherpad, or launchpad + a wiki page) we could do something like follows: > > 1. create bad blueprint > 2. create gerrit review with detailed proposal on the blueprint > 3. iterate in gerrit working towards blueprint approval > 4. once approved copy back the approved text into the blueprint (which > should now be sufficiently detailed) > > Basically blueprints would get design review, and we'd be pretty sure we > liked the approach before the blueprint is approved. This would > hopefully reduce the late design review in the code reviews that's > happening a lot now. > > There are plenty of niggly details that would be need to be worked out > > * what's the basic text / template format of the design to be reviewed > (probably want a base template for folks to just keep things consistent). > * is this happening in the nova tree (somewhere in docs/ - NEP (Nova > Enhancement Proposals), or is it happening in a separate gerrit tree. > * are there timelines for blueprint approval in a cycle? after which > point, we don't review any new items. > > Anyway, plenty of details to be sorted. However we should figure out if > the big idea has support before we sort out the details on this one. > > Launchpad blueprints will still be used for tracking once things are > approved, but this will give us a standard way to iterate on that > content and get to agreement on approach. > > -Sean > > -- > Sean Dague > Samsung Research America > s...@dague.net / sean.da...@samsung.com > http://dague.net > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > -- ChangBo Guo(gcb)
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
