On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 11:20:08AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
> wrote:
>
> > In this thread about code review:
> >
> >
> > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/013701.html
> >
> > I mentioned that I thought there we
List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Stats on blueprint design info / creation times
For the case of an item that has no significant doc of its own but is related
to an extensive blueprint, how about linking to that extensive blueprint?
___
OpenStack-dev
For the case of an item that has no significant doc of its own but is
related to an extensive blueprint, how about linking to that extensive
blueprint?
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/m
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In this thread about code review:
>
>
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/013701.html
>
> I mentioned that I thought there were too many blueprints created without
> sufficient supporting design information
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 05:18:21PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:53:25PM -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>> It would be more interesting to check how many blueprints are created
>>> more than two weeks after the design summit. Those would b
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 05:18:21PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:53:25PM -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Anne Gentle wrote:
> > > - Less than 1 in 4 blueprints is created before the devel
> > > period starts for a release.
> > >
> > > I find this date
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:53:25PM -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Anne Gentle wrote:
> > - Less than 1 in 4 blueprints is created before the devel
> > period starts for a release.
> >
> > I find this date mismatch especially intriguing, because the Foundation
> > and member company s
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 10:36:39AM -0500, Anne Gentle wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Daniel P. Berrange
> wrote:
> > The data for the last 3 releases is:
> >
> > Series: folsom
> > Specs: 178
> > Specs (no URL): 144
> > Specs (w/ URL): 34
> > Specs (Early): 38
> >
On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 14:38 -0300, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Note that in some cases, some "improvements" that do not clearly fall
> into the "bug" category are landed without a blueprint link (or a bug
> link). So a first step could be to require that a review always
> references a bug or a blueprin
Anne Gentle wrote:
> - Less than 1 in 4 blueprints is created before the devel
> period starts for a release.
>
> I find this date mismatch especially intriguing, because the Foundation
> and member company sponsors spend millions on Design Summits annually
> and caters so much to ge
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In this thread about code review:
>
>
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/013701.html
>
> I mentioned that I thought there were too many blueprints created without
> sufficient supporting design information
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> In this thread about code review:
>
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/013701.html
>
> I mentioned that I thought there were too many blueprints created without
> sufficient supporting design information and were being used for "tickbox"
In this thread about code review:
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/013701.html
I mentioned that I thought there were too many blueprints created without
sufficient supporting design information and were being used for "tickbox"
process compliance only. I based this
13 matches
Mail list logo
