On 20/06/14 07:29 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
On Thu, 2014-06-19 at 20:36 -0700, Dustin Lundquist wrote:Dolph,I appreciate the suggestion. In the mean time how does the review process work without core developers to approve gerrit submissions?If you're just getting started, have a small number (possibly just 1 to begin with) of developers collaborate closely, with the minimum possible process and then use that list of developers as your core review team when you gradually start adopting some process. Aim to get from zero to bootstrapped with that core team in a small number of weeks at most. Minimum possible process could mean a git repo anywhere that those initial developers have direct push access to. You could use stackforge from the beginning and the developers just approve their own changes, but that's a bit annoying.
+1 this is how we did it in Marconi (except for the repo with push access). At the beginning, we kept a core team of 2 developers despite there being at least 4 ppl working on the project. This allowed the team to have better discussions on what got in the repo and what not. One benefit of using stackforge is that you get a great CI system to test your project with but the development will slow down for sure. We started on stackforge right away, then had a 2 days hackathon on a github fork which was not a good idea because we had to submit al those patches for review after the hackathon. :( Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
pgp3yPPKqEift.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
