Hi Thierry, Appoligies for the late blueprint submission. I guess I like using Blueprints for missing features so that I can setup the dependencies in launchpad. On this specific issue I just wanted some community comments and communication on the notes I had in etherpad. Although my initial email was poorly worded I did get a couple useful comments.
Bugs vs. Blueprints is sort of a gray area. When a larger blue print is accepted (like the Openstack 1.1 API) should we file component features as bugs or blueprints? In my case I could have easily considered this a bug as well since we should already support the v1.0 API right? Dan -----Original Message----- From: "Thierry Carrez" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, March 5, 2011 4:14pm To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Openstack] OS API server password generation Jay Pipes wrote: > Does anyone else feel it's a bit late to be targeting new blueprints > for Cactus since we're 2 weeks from branch merge proposal freeze? > > http://wiki.openstack.org/CactusReleaseSchedule Yes. SpecSubmissionDeadline for Cactus was one month ago. It was tolerated so far to add simple blueprints that are fairly obvious and do not require discussion (even retrospectively). But if the added specs require design discussion and consensus, it's clearly too late: at this stage in the cycle we should be busy pumping code out and reviewing proposed code branches, not really participating in long design threads... -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) Release Manager, OpenStack _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
