Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Tue, 2014-08-12 at 15:56 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. (In the spirit of we really need to step back and laugh at ourselves sometimes ... ) Two years ago, we were worried about patches getting merged in less than 2 hours and had a discussion about imposing a minimum review time. How times have changed! Is it even possible to land a patch in less than two hours now? :) Looking back over the thread, this part stopped me in my tracks: https://lists.launchpad.net/openstack/msg08625.html On Tue, Mar 13, 2012, Mark McLoughlin markmc@xx wrote: Sometimes there can be a few folks working through an issue together and the patch gets pushed and approved so quickly that no-one else gets a chance to review. Everyone has an opportunity to review even after a patch gets merged. JE It's not quite perfect, but if you squint you could conclude that Johannes and I have both completely reversed our opinions in the intervening two years :) The lesson I take from that is to not get too caught up in the current moment. We're growing and evolving rapidly. If we assume everyone is acting in good faith, and allow each other to debate earnestly without feelings getting hurt ... we should be able to work through anything. Now, back on topic - digging through that thread, it doesn't seem we settled on the idea of we can just revert it later if someone has an objection in this thread. Does anyone recall when that idea first came up? Thanks, Mark. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 10:06:13AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: On Tue, 2014-08-12 at 15:56 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. (In the spirit of we really need to step back and laugh at ourselves sometimes ... ) Two years ago, we were worried about patches getting merged in less than 2 hours and had a discussion about imposing a minimum review time. How times have changed! Is it even possible to land a patch in less than two hours now? :) Looking back over the thread, this part stopped me in my tracks: https://lists.launchpad.net/openstack/msg08625.html On Tue, Mar 13, 2012, Mark McLoughlin markmc@xx wrote: Sometimes there can be a few folks working through an issue together and the patch gets pushed and approved so quickly that no-one else gets a chance to review. Everyone has an opportunity to review even after a patch gets merged. JE It's not quite perfect, but if you squint you could conclude that Johannes and I have both completely reversed our opinions in the intervening two years :) The lesson I take from that is to not get too caught up in the current moment. We're growing and evolving rapidly. If we assume everyone is acting in good faith, and allow each other to debate earnestly without feelings getting hurt ... we should be able to work through anything. Now, back on topic - digging through that thread, it doesn't seem we settled on the idea of we can just revert it later if someone has an objection in this thread. Does anyone recall when that idea first came up? Probably lost in time - I've seen it said several times on Nova IRC channel over the year(s) when we made a strategic decision to merge something quickly. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Tue, 2014-08-12 at 15:56 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Proposed here: https://review.openstack.org/114188 Thanks, Mark. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On 08/12/2014 10:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Looks reasonable to me. -- Russell Bryant ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
Looks reasonable to me. +1 --Dan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On 08/12/2014 10:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Eminently reasonable. +1 -jay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. This looks good to me as well, and personally, I think this type of thing should be project wide. I'd be keen to adopt this for Neutron as well. Kyle Mark. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:46 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/12/2014 10:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Eminently reasonable. +1 +1 -jay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 03:56:44PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. A bit cumbersome, but given we have to work within Gerrit's limitations, it looks like a valid approach / process to me. Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
Dan Smith wrote: Looks reasonable to me. +1 +1 -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 9:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Thanks for the write up, Mark. When I first read the thread I thought it'd be about the case where a core takes a vacation or is unreachable _after_ marking a review -2. Can this case be considered in this policy as well (or is it already and I don't know it?) Thanks, Anne Mark. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on an issue? Michael On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Mark. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Rackspace Australia ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
Should subsequent patches be reverted as well that depended on the change in question? On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 7:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Mark. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Kevin Benton ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
Actually, thinking on this more -- the lack of consensus is on the attempt to re-add the patch, so I guess we'd handle that just like we do for a contentious patch now. Michael On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote: This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on an issue? Michael On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Mark. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Rackspace Australia -- Rackspace Australia ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On 8/12/2014 4:03 PM, Michael Still wrote: This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on an issue? Michael On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Hey (Terrible name for a policy, I know) From the version_cap saga here: https://review.openstack.org/110754 I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations like this. Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the procedure to be: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the Development policies doc. Mark. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev Just thinking out loud, you could do something like a 2/3 majority vote on the issue but that sounds too much like government, which is generally terrible. Otherwise maybe the PTL is the tie-breaker? -- Thanks, Matt Riedemann ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Aug 12, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote: This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on an issue? In an extreme case, the PTL has the authority to make the call. In general I would like to think we can all just put on our big boy pants and talk through contentious issues to find a resolution that everyone can live with. -- Russell Bryant ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Retrospective veto revert policy
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote: On Aug 12, 2014, at 5:10 PM, Michael Still mi...@stillhq.com wrote: This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on an issue? In an extreme case, the PTL has the authority to make the call. In general I would like to think we can all just put on our big boy pants and talk through contentious issues to find a resolution that everyone can live with. That's what we've done for the few cases I can remember (think nova v3 API). It is expensive though in terms of time and emotional costs, but I think its worth it to keep the community together. In general I think a PTL fiat is something to be avoided if at all possible. Michael -- Rackspace Australia ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
