On 02/04/15 07:20, Michael Still wrote: > I'd like another term as Nova PTL, if you'll have me. >
... > > I think its a good idea also to examine briefly some statistics about specs: > > Juno: > approved but not implemented: 40 > implemented: 49 > > Kilo: > approved but not implemented: 30 > implemented: 32 Hi, Michael, It has been my impression over at least the last 2 releases that the most significant barrier to progress in Nova is the lack of core reviewer bandwidth. This affects not only feature development, but also the much less sexy paying down of technical debt. There have been various attempts to redefine roles and create new processes, but no attempt that I have seen to address the underlying fundamental issue: the lack of people who can +2 patches. There is a discussion currently ongoing on this list, "The Evolution of core developer to maintainer", which contains a variety of proposals. However, none of these will gain anything close to a consensus. The result of this will be that none of them will be implemented. We will be left by default with the status quo, and the situation will continue not to improve despite the new processes we will invent instead. The only way we are going to change the status quo is by fiat. We should of course make every effort to get as many people on board as possible. However, when change is required, but nobody can agree precisely which change, we need positive leadership from the PTL. Would you like to take a position on how to improve core reviewer throughput in the next cycle? Thanks, Matt -- Matthew Booth Red Hat Engineering, Virtualisation Team Phone: +442070094448 (UK) GPG ID: D33C3490 GPG FPR: 3733 612D 2D05 5458 8A8A 1600 3441 EA19 D33C 3490 __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev