Given how this discussion has gone, I understand Mohammad's despair.  But it 
seems like people are treating the Stackforge proposal as really nothing more 
than a black hole.  I'm a relative newcomer to this community, so that's 
probably why I took Mark at his word when he presented it as a way to quickly 
improve API design.  Well, that, and I'm a complete believer that iterating on 
running code is 10x better than any form of doc review.

Chuck


On Aug 6, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Mohammad Banikazemi 
<m...@us.ibm.com<mailto:m...@us.ibm.com>>
 wrote:


Yes, indeed.
I do not want to be over dramatic but the discussion on the original "Group 
Based Policy and the way forward" thread is nothing short of heartbreaking. 
After months and months of discussions, three presentations at the past three 
summits, a design session at the last summit, and (most relevant to this 
thread) the approval of the spec, why are we talking about the merits of the 
work now?

I understand if people think this is not a good idea or this is not a good 
time. What I do not understand is why these concerns were not raised clearly 
and openly earlier.

Best,

Mohammad


<graycol.gif>Stefano Maffulli ---08/06/2014 04:47:21 PM---On Wed 06 Aug 2014 
01:21:26 PM PDT, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: > So I don't think it's fair to blame 
re

From: Stefano Maffulli <stef...@openstack.org<mailto:stef...@openstack.org>>
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Date: 08/06/2014 04:47 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] How to improve the specs review process (was Re: 
[Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward)

________________________________



On Wed 06 Aug 2014 01:21:26 PM PDT, Eugene Nikanorov wrote:
> So I don't think it's fair to blame reviewers here.

Just want to be super clear: there is no 'blaming' here. This is a
request to regroup and look at why we are having this conversation about
GBP now, this late in cycle, and about such fundamental topics (the
choice of 'endpoint' as name is only one of them), after in-person
conversations over more than one release cycle and summits.

I am available for the meeting on Monday, Kyle.

In order to prepare for the meeting we should agree on the scope of the
root cause analysis. I think the problem should be framed around the
message Mark McClain sent, especially the "Why this email" which I quote
below:

> Our community has been discussing and working on Group Based Policy
> (GBP) for many months.  I think the discussion has reached a point
> where we need to openly discuss a few issues before moving forward.
[...]

I think the fact that this very fair question has been raised so late is
the problem we need to find the cause for. Would you agree?

We'll use time during the meeting on Monday to use a simple technique to
investigate this deeply, no need to spend time now and via email.

/stef

--
Ask and answer questions on 
https://ask.openstack.org<https://ask.openstack.org/>

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to