Russell Bryant wrote: > On 03/21/2014 02:55 PM, Stefano Maffulli wrote: >> While I'm here, and for the records, I think that creating a new >> workflow 'temporarily' only until we have Storyboard usable, is a *huge* >> mistake. It seems to me that you're ignoring or at least underestimating >> the amount of *people* that will need to be retrained, the amount of >> documentation that need to be fixed/adjusted. And the confusion that >> this will create on the 'long tail' developers. >> >> A change like this, done with a couple of announcements on a mailing >> list and a few mentions on IRC is not enough to steer the ~400 >> developers who may be affected by this change. And then we'll have to >> manage the change again when we switch to Storyboard. If I were you, I'd >> focus on getting storyboard ready to use asap, instead. >> >> There, I said it, and I'm now going back to my cave. > > I think the current process and system and *so* broken that we can't > afford to wait. Further, after talking to Thierry, it seems quite > likely that we would continue using this exact process, even with > Storyboard. Storyboard isn't a review tool and won't solve all of the > project's problems.
Indeed. Storyboard is primarily designed as a task tracker. It lets you groups tasks affecting various repositories but ultimately related to the same "story". So feature stories in StoryBoard can definitely have, as their first task, a "design" task that will be linked to a change to a -specs repository. Then when the design is approved you can add more tasks to that same story, corresponding to implementation steps. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
