Yeh, this seems incredibly poluting, don't do this. That's not something
I want in our long term git history without conversation about the
policy. Every other Impact flag that we use in OpenStack had a pretty
long conversation about it's addition.

The issue arrises because the NFV team has created *so* many blueprints
that they believe are critical to them that it creates a query string
too long for browsers to handle. Which I think is it's own issue.

I'm liable to start -1ing for commit message pollution if I see this
tag. Especially as a bunch of the NFV related features that got jammed
through on feature freeze without sufficient testing are currently now
breaking (as one would expect without sufficient testing). So I feel
this project management dashboard / drum beat is not serving anyone
well. Not OpenStack, not the NFV team, not anyone.


On 10/29/2014 06:25 AM, Maru Newby wrote:
> Am I the only one wondering whether introducing arbitrary tagging into our 
> commit messages sets a bad precedent?  Or was there a discussion on this 
> topic that I missed? 
> Maru
> On Jun 17, 2014, at 2:27 PM, Sylvain Bauza <> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> There is an action for creating a Gerrit dashboard to show all
>> NFV-related specs and patches.
>> As it requires to have a specific label for discriminating them, I'm
>> adding "NFVImpact" in all the patches proposed in [1].
>> The side effect is that it creates another patchset and so runs another
>> Jenkins check so don't worry about it.
>> I'll do a team status by tomorrow but meanwhile, please make sure that
>> if you upload a new patch to Gerrit, it will be marked as "NFVImpact" in
>> the commit message.
>> Many thanks,
>> -Sylvain
>> [1]
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list

Sean Dague

OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to