On Mon, Jun 30 2014, Joshua Harlow wrote: > There is a balance here that needs to be worked out and I've seen > specs start to turn into requirements for every single patch (even if > the patch is pretty small). I hope we can rework the 'balance in the > force' to avoid being so strict that every little thing requires a > spec. This will not end well for us as a community. > > How have others thought the spec process has worked out so far? To > much overhead, to little…? > > I personally am of the opinion that specs should be used for large > topics (defining large is of course arbitrary); and I hope we find the > right balance to avoid scaring everyone away from working with > openstack. Maybe all of this is part of openstack maturing, I'm not > sure, but it'd be great if we could have some guidelines around when > is a spec needed and when isn't it and take it into consideration when > requesting a spec that the person you have requested may get > frustrated and just leave the community (and we must not have this > happen) if you ask for it without explaining why and how clearly.
+1 I think specs are too much overhead for small features. A set of guidelines about when specs are needed would be sufficient. Leave the option about when to submit a design vs. when to submit code to the contributor. Jason _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
