On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Russell Bryant <[email protected]> wrote:
> We recently discussed the idea of using gerrit to review blueprint > specifications [1]. There was a lot of support for the idea so we have > proceeded with putting this together before the start of the Juno > development cycle. > > We now have a new project set up, openstack/nova-specs. You submit > changes to it just like any other project in gerrit. Find the README > and a template for specifications here: > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova-specs/tree/README.rst > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova-specs/tree/template.rst This is great! This is the same basic process we've used for API-impacting changes in keystone and it has worked really well for us, and we're eager to adopt the same thing on a more general level. The process seems overly complicated to me, however. As a blueprint proposer, I find it odd that I have to propose my blueprint as part of approved/ -- why not just have a single directory to file things away that have been implemented? Is it even necessary to preserve them? (why not just git rm when implemented?) Gerrit already provides a permalink (to the review). > > > The blueprint process wiki page has also been updated to reflect that we > will be using this for Nova: > > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints#Nova > > Note that *all* Juno blueprints, including ones that were previously > approved, must go through this new process. This will help ensure that > blueprints previously approved still make sense, as well as ensure that > all Juno specs follow a more complete and consistent format. > > Before the flood of spec reviews start, we would really like to get > feedback on the content of the spec template. It includes things like > "deployer impact" which could use more input. Feel free to provide > feedback on list, or just suggest updates via proposed changes in gerrit. > > I suspect this process to evolve a bit throughout Juno, but I'm very > excited about the positive impact it is likely to have on our overall > result. > > Thanks! > > [1] > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-March/029232.html > > -- > Russell Bryant > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
