On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Daniel P. Berrange <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:51:32AM +0000, Alan Kavanagh wrote: >> How to do we handle specs that have slipped through the cracks >> and did not make it for Juno? > > Rebase the proposal so it is under the 'kilo' directory path > instead of 'juno' and submit it for review again. Make sure > to keep the ChangeId line intact so people see the history > of any review comments in the earlier Juno proposal.
Yes, but... I think we should talk about tweaking the structure of the juno directory. Something like having proposed, approved, and implemented directories. That would provide better signalling to operators about what we actually did, what we thought we'd do, and what we didn't do. I worry that gerrit is a terrible place to archive the things which were proposed by not approved. If someone else wants to pick something up later, its super hard for them to find. Michael -- Rackspace Australia _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackemail@example.com http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev