On 02:22 Sat 07 Mar , Chen, Wei D wrote: > Hi, > > I thought the feature should be approved as long as the SPEC[1] is merged, > but it seems I am wrong from the beginning[2], both of > them (SPEC merged and BP approval[4][5]) is necessary and mandatory for > getting some effective reviews, right? anyone can help to > confirm with that? > > Besides, who is eligible to define/modify the priority in the list[3], only > PTL or any core? I am trying to understand the > acceptable procedure for the coming 'L'. > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/136253/ > [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/147726/ > [3] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/cinder-k3-priorities > [4] > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/support-modify-volume-image-metadata > [5] > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/python-cinderclient/+spec/support-modify-volume-image-metadata
There are a few things: 1) The blueprint should've been approved and targeted for K-3 after the spec was merged, but that never happened. 2) This shouldn't have been -2 on March 6th, it still had until March 10th technically since the blueprint should've been approved. 3) There were disageements on snapshots having mutable metadata as discussed in a Cinder meeting [1]. I agree with Duncan on how this can break billing properties. I also mentioned in the meeting that I would not merge this until that was addressed. Regardless, we're way too late for K now. Apologies on this not been targeted, but feel free to let me know in the future if I miss something of yours that should be targeted so it's prioritized. [1] - http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/cinder/2015/cinder.2015-02-11-16.00.log.html#l-186 -- Mike Perez __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
