On 06/10/15 12:11 -0400, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
Overall I think this is a good idea and the time frame proposal also looks
good. Few suggestions in-line.

On 10/6/15 10:36 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:

   Greetings,

   Not so long ago, Erno started a thread[0] in this list to discuss the
   abandon policies for patches that haven't been updated in Glance.

   I'd like to go forward and start following that policy with some
   changes that you can find below:

   1) Lets do this on patches that haven't had any activity in the last 2
   months. This adds one more month to Erno's proposal. The reason being
   that during the lat cycle, there were some ups and downs in the review
   flow that caused some patches to get stuck.



+2 . I think 2 months is a reasonable time frame. Though, I think this should
be done on glance , python-glanceclient and glance-store repos and not
glance-specs. Specs can sometimes need to sit and wait while discussion may
happen at other places and then a gist is added back the spec.

Yup, no plans to apply this to glance-specs, just code.

Thanks for the feedback,
Flavio



   2) Do this just on master, for all patches regardless they fix a
   bug or implement a spec and for all patches regardless their review
   status.



+2 . No comments, looks clean.


   3) The patch will be first marked as a WIP and then abandoned if the
   patch is not updated in 1 week. This will put this patches at the
   begining of the queue but using the Glance review dashboard should
   help keeing focus.



While I think that one may give someone a email/irc heads up if the proposer
doesn't show up and we will use the context and wisdom of feedback this sorta
seems to imply for a general case when a developer is new and their intent to
get a patch in one cycle isn't clear.


   Unless there are some critical things missing in the above or strong
   opiniones against this, I'll make this effective starting next Monday
   October 12th.



I added some comments above for possible brainstorming. No serious objections,
looking forward to this cleanup process.


   Best regards,
   Flavio

   [0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-February/
   056829.html



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


--

Thanks,
Nikhil


--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco

Attachment: pgpK_pi2Tj7Yr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

__________________________________________________________________________
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