I wasn’t really envisioning a big discussion on the bugs; more like a brief 
notice period to let reviewers know high-priority items. Could definitely spend 
longer over it if that is preferred. Timing aside, the overall idea sounds good 
though?

Lin: That’s a good idea. A wiki page would probably suffice.

Rob

From: Lin Hua Cheng <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, 29 September 2015 04:11
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] Horizon Productivity Suggestion

I agree with Travis that 2-3 minutes is not enough, that may not be even enough 
to talk about one bug. :)

We could save some time if we have someone monitoring the bugs/feature and 
publish the high priority item into a report - something similar to what 
Keystone does [1].  Reviewers can look this up every time if they need to 
prioritize their reviews.

We can rotate this responsibility among cores every month - even non-core if 
someone wants to volunteer.

-Lin

[1] 
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/KeystoneMeeting#Keystone_Weekly_Bug_Reports




On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Tripp, Travis S 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Things always move more quickly at the end of a cycle because people feel 
release pressure, but I do think this is a good idea. 2 - 3 minutes isn’t very 
realistic. It would need to be planned for longer.





On 9/28/15, 3:57 AM, "Rob Cresswell (rcresswe)" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

>Hi folks,
>
>I¹m wondering if we could try marking out a small 2-3 minute slot at the
>start of each weekly meeting to highlight Critical/ High bugs that have
>code up for review, as well as important blueprints that have code up for
>review. These would be blueprints for features that were identified as
>high priority at the summit.
>
>The thought here is that we were very efficient in L-RC1 at moving code
>along, which is nice for productivity, but not really great for stability;
>it would be good to do this kind of targeted work earlier in the cycle.
>I¹ve noticed other projects doing this in their meetings, and it seems
>quite effective.
>
>Rob
>
>
>__________________________________________________________________________
>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe: 
>[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe<http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe>
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: 
[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe<http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to