Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Thomas Morin]

Doug Wiegley :
As an alternative, to be considered to cleaned up, note that octavia, 
also a neutron stadium project, puts its specs in its own repo, runs 
its own doc jobs, etc. Pros and cons, but just pointing out that its 
out there.


Same for networking-bgpvpn: while the base discussion on the API 
introduced by this project initially happened in neutron-specs [1], we 
now host it in our repo [2] (doc dir, doc  jobs and new specs to be 
reviewed will be in this repo as well).


This is works for us today.

-Thomas

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177740/
[2] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/networking-bgpvpn/




On Oct 22, 2015, at 2:47 AM, Kyle Mestery > wrote:


On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Armando M.>wrote:




On 21 October 2015 at 10:29, Kyle Mestery>wrote:

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Armando
M.>wrote:



On 21 October 2015 at 09:53, Kyle
Mestery>wrote:

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Armando
M.>wrote:



On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal
Sagie>wrote:

Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr
part of this?


No, why would we?

The reason to consider it is because Kuryr is a
sub-project of Neutron, and they are doing their spec
submissions following the Neutron guidelines. Adding
the kuryr-core gerrit group to be on part with the
*aas repos makes sense here. If other sub-projects
(like L2FW, SFC, etc.) start doing spec reviews in
the neutron-specs repository, then adding them makes
sense too.


I don't believe this is the road we set ourselves on when
we started the decomp/stadium. We wanted a clear
separation of concerns and I don't see how going down
this path is going to help us achieve that.

I don't see the grounds to have such an abrupt change in
direction right now, especially for the level of work
that that would imply and the pressure that would put on
the drivers team. Anyone is free to review and contribute
where it matters for them, and location should not
prevent them from doing so.

I was merely implying that since these projects are part of
neutron, and they have specs, keeping them in one place makes
sense. And by doing that, we'd need to give them +2 powers
for their core reviewers. But, I'm fine with leaving things
the way they are and having them put their specs in their
devref. But we should update the devref in Neutron to reflect
this, e.g. that we don't expect specs in neutron-specs for
things outside [neutron, neutron-fwaas, neutron-lbaas,
neutron-vpnaas].


IMO, it's pretty clear from here [1], which I revised in the
context of [2]. Not sure if there's anything else that's left to
misunderstanding.


I think this [1] helps to make it 100% clearer, at least to me.

[1]https://review.openstack.org/238190


[1]http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#neutron-specs-core-reviewer-team
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/

We already started sending Kuryr spec to the
Neutron repository and I think it would make
sense to manage it
as part of Neutron spec process.


No, unless what you are asking are changes to the
core. Do you have a reference for me to look at?

See above, perhaps I answered this for you.



Any opinions on that?

Gal.

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando
M.>wrote:

Hi folks,

During revision of the Neutron teams [1],
we made clear that the neutron-specs repo
is to be targeted by specs for all the
Neutron projects (core + *-aas).

For this reason I made sure that the
neutron-specs-core team +2 right was
extended to all the core teams.

Be mindful, use your +2 

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Doug Wiegley]

As an alternative, to be considered to cleaned up, note that octavia, also a 
neutron stadium project, puts its specs in its own repo, runs its own doc jobs, 
etc. Pros and cons, but just pointing out that its out there.

Thanks,
doug


> On Oct 22, 2015, at 2:47 AM, Kyle Mestery  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Armando M.  > wrote:
> 
> 
> On 21 October 2015 at 10:29, Kyle Mestery  > wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Armando M.  > wrote:
> 
> 
> On 21 October 2015 at 09:53, Kyle Mestery  > wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Armando M.  > wrote:
> 
> 
> On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  > wrote:
> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
> 
> No, why would we?
>  
> The reason to consider it is because Kuryr is a sub-project of Neutron, and 
> they are doing their spec submissions following the Neutron guidelines. 
> Adding the kuryr-core gerrit group to be on part with the *aas repos makes 
> sense here. If other sub-projects (like L2FW, SFC, etc.) start doing spec 
> reviews in the neutron-specs repository, then adding them makes sense too.
> 
> I don't believe this is the road we set ourselves on when we started the 
> decomp/stadium. We wanted a clear separation of concerns and I don't see how 
> going down this path is going to help us achieve that.
> 
> I don't see the grounds to have such an abrupt change in direction right now, 
> especially for the level of work that that would imply and the pressure that 
> would put on the drivers team. Anyone is free to review and contribute where 
> it matters for them, and location should not prevent them from doing so.
>  
> I was merely implying that since these projects are part of neutron, and they 
> have specs, keeping them in one place makes sense. And by doing that, we'd 
> need to give them +2 powers for their core reviewers. But, I'm fine with 
> leaving things the way they are and having them put their specs in their 
> devref. But we should update the devref in Neutron to reflect this, e.g. that 
> we don't expect specs in neutron-specs for things outside [neutron, 
> neutron-fwaas, neutron-lbaas, neutron-vpnaas].
>  
> 
> IMO, it's pretty clear from here [1], which I revised in the context of [2]. 
> Not sure if there's anything else that's left to misunderstanding.
> 
> 
> I think this [1] helps to make it 100% clearer, at least to me.
> 
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/238190 
>  
> [1] 
> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#neutron-specs-core-reviewer-team
>  
> 
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/ 
> 
> 
>  
>  
> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I think 
> it would make sense to manage it
> as part of Neutron spec process.
> 
> No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a 
> reference for me to look at?
>  
> See above, perhaps I answered this for you.
>  
> 
> Any opinions on that?
> 
> Gal.
> 
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  > wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the 
> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects 
> (core + *-aas).
> 
> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right was 
> extended to all the core teams.
> 
> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas project, 
> you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the project you're 
> core of.
> 
> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and 
> lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made core 
> by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within your area 
> of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt. 
> 
> Reviews are always welcome though!
> 
> Cheers,
> Armando
> 
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/ 
> 
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members 
> 
> [3] 
> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>  
> 
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: 

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Doug Wiegley]

'be considered to cleaned up’

i meant OR, not to. But I note that armax’s patch already clarified this, so 
I’ll go back to my jetlag stupor. :-)

Thanks,
doug

> On Oct 24, 2015, at 9:07 PM, Doug Wiegley  
> wrote:
> 
> As an alternative, to be considered to cleaned up, note that octavia, also a 
> neutron stadium project, puts its specs in its own repo, runs its own doc 
> jobs, etc. Pros and cons, but just pointing out that its out there.
> 
> Thanks,
> doug
> 
> 
>> On Oct 22, 2015, at 2:47 AM, Kyle Mestery > > wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Armando M. > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 21 October 2015 at 10:29, Kyle Mestery > > wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Armando M. > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 21 October 2015 at 09:53, Kyle Mestery > > wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Armando M. > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie > > wrote:
>> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
>> 
>> No, why would we?
>>  
>> The reason to consider it is because Kuryr is a sub-project of Neutron, and 
>> they are doing their spec submissions following the Neutron guidelines. 
>> Adding the kuryr-core gerrit group to be on part with the *aas repos makes 
>> sense here. If other sub-projects (like L2FW, SFC, etc.) start doing spec 
>> reviews in the neutron-specs repository, then adding them makes sense too.
>> 
>> I don't believe this is the road we set ourselves on when we started the 
>> decomp/stadium. We wanted a clear separation of concerns and I don't see how 
>> going down this path is going to help us achieve that.
>> 
>> I don't see the grounds to have such an abrupt change in direction right 
>> now, especially for the level of work that that would imply and the pressure 
>> that would put on the drivers team. Anyone is free to review and contribute 
>> where it matters for them, and location should not prevent them from doing 
>> so.
>>  
>> I was merely implying that since these projects are part of neutron, and 
>> they have specs, keeping them in one place makes sense. And by doing that, 
>> we'd need to give them +2 powers for their core reviewers. But, I'm fine 
>> with leaving things the way they are and having them put their specs in 
>> their devref. But we should update the devref in Neutron to reflect this, 
>> e.g. that we don't expect specs in neutron-specs for things outside 
>> [neutron, neutron-fwaas, neutron-lbaas, neutron-vpnaas].
>>  
>> 
>> IMO, it's pretty clear from here [1], which I revised in the context of [2]. 
>> Not sure if there's anything else that's left to misunderstanding.
>> 
>> 
>> I think this [1] helps to make it 100% clearer, at least to me.
>> 
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/238190 
>>  
>> [1] 
>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#neutron-specs-core-reviewer-team
>>  
>> 
>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/ 
>> 
>> 
>>  
>>  
>> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I think 
>> it would make sense to manage it
>> as part of Neutron spec process.
>> 
>> No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a 
>> reference for me to look at?
>>  
>> See above, perhaps I answered this for you.
>>  
>> 
>> Any opinions on that?
>> 
>> Gal.
>> 
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M. > > wrote:
>> Hi folks,
>> 
>> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the 
>> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects 
>> (core + *-aas).
>> 
>> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right was 
>> extended to all the core teams.
>> 
>> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas 
>> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the 
>> project you're core of.
>> 
>> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and 
>> lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made 
>> core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within your 
>> area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt. 
>> 
>> Reviews are always welcome though!
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Armando
>> 
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/ 
>> 
>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members 
>> 

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Gal Sagie]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Armando M.  wrote:

>
>
> On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  wrote:
>
>> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
>>
>
> No, why would we?
>

[Gal] Because Kuryr is a special project which was created in order to
expose Neutron and its services to containers networking,
 its mission (at least as defined right now) is to bridge the gaps
between containers networking world and Neutron and for doing it
 it already depends on the feature/spec process of Neutron.
 That is why it make sense to me that just like the services
projects, our spec approval process will be handled
 as part of Neutron.


>
>
>> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
>> think it would make sense to manage it
>> as part of Neutron spec process.
>>
>
> No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a
> reference for me to look at?
>
>
  [Gal]   I dont understand what you mean "No" here, first this spec is
sent to Mitaka:
 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/213490/

And as i mentioned above Kuryr spec process depends on Neutron
(and the specs that are sent
to Neutron core)


>> Any opinions on that?
>>
>> Gal.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
>>> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
>>> (core + *-aas).
>>>
>>> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right
>>> was extended to all the core teams.
>>>
>>> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
>>> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
>>> project you're core of.
>>>
>>> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
>>> lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
>>> core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
>>> your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.
>>>
>>> Reviews are always welcome though!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Armando
>>>
>>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
>>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
>>> [3]
>>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards ,
>>
>> The G.
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
Best Regards ,

The G.
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Armando M.]

On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  wrote:

> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
>

No, why would we?


> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
> think it would make sense to manage it
> as part of Neutron spec process.
>

No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a
reference for me to look at?


>
> Any opinions on that?
>
> Gal.
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
>> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
>> (core + *-aas).
>>
>> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right was
>> extended to all the core teams.
>>
>> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
>> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
>> project you're core of.
>>
>> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
>> lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
>> core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
>> your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.
>>
>> Reviews are always welcome though!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Armando
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
>> [3]
>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards ,
>
> The G.
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Kyle Mestery]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Armando M.  wrote:

>
>
> On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  wrote:
>
>> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
>>
>
> No, why would we?
>
>
The reason to consider it is because Kuryr is a sub-project of Neutron, and
they are doing their spec submissions following the Neutron guidelines.
Adding the kuryr-core gerrit group to be on part with the *aas repos makes
sense here. If other sub-projects (like L2FW, SFC, etc.) start doing spec
reviews in the neutron-specs repository, then adding them makes sense too.


> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
>> think it would make sense to manage it
>> as part of Neutron spec process.
>>
>
> No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a
> reference for me to look at?
>
>
See above, perhaps I answered this for you.


>
>> Any opinions on that?
>>
>> Gal.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
>>> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
>>> (core + *-aas).
>>>
>>> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right
>>> was extended to all the core teams.
>>>
>>> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
>>> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
>>> project you're core of.
>>>
>>> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
>>> lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
>>> core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
>>> your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.
>>>
>>> Reviews are always welcome though!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Armando
>>>
>>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
>>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
>>> [3]
>>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards ,
>>
>> The G.
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Armando M.]

On 21 October 2015 at 10:29, Kyle Mestery  wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 21 October 2015 at 09:53, Kyle Mestery  wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Armando M.  wrote:
>>>


 On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  wrote:

> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
>

 No, why would we?


>>> The reason to consider it is because Kuryr is a sub-project of Neutron,
>>> and they are doing their spec submissions following the Neutron guidelines.
>>> Adding the kuryr-core gerrit group to be on part with the *aas repos makes
>>> sense here. If other sub-projects (like L2FW, SFC, etc.) start doing spec
>>> reviews in the neutron-specs repository, then adding them makes sense too.
>>>
>>
>> I don't believe this is the road we set ourselves on when we started the
>> decomp/stadium. We wanted a clear separation of concerns and I don't see
>> how going down this path is going to help us achieve that.
>>
>> I don't see the grounds to have such an abrupt change in direction right
>> now, especially for the level of work that that would imply and the
>> pressure that would put on the drivers team. Anyone is free to review and
>> contribute where it matters for them, and location should not prevent them
>> from doing so.
>>
>>
> I was merely implying that since these projects are part of neutron, and
> they have specs, keeping them in one place makes sense. And by doing that,
> we'd need to give them +2 powers for their core reviewers. But, I'm fine
> with leaving things the way they are and having them put their specs in
> their devref. But we should update the devref in Neutron to reflect this,
> e.g. that we don't expect specs in neutron-specs for things outside
> [neutron, neutron-fwaas, neutron-lbaas, neutron-vpnaas].
>
>

IMO, it's pretty clear from here [1], which I revised in the context of
[2]. Not sure if there's anything else that's left to misunderstanding.

[1]
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#neutron-specs-core-reviewer-team
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/



>
>>>
 We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
> think it would make sense to manage it
> as part of Neutron spec process.
>

 No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a
 reference for me to look at?


>>> See above, perhaps I answered this for you.
>>>
>>
>>>

> Any opinions on that?
>
> Gal.
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M. 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
>> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron 
>> projects
>> (core + *-aas).
>>
>> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right
>> was extended to all the core teams.
>>
>> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
>> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
>> project you're core of.
>>
>> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy
>> and lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been
>> made core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only
>> within your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.
>>
>> Reviews are always welcome though!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Armando
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
>> [3]
>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>>
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards ,
>
> The G.
>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


 __
 OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 Unsubscribe:
 openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


>>>
>>>
>>> 

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Kyle Mestery]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Armando M.  wrote:

>
>
> On 21 October 2015 at 10:29, Kyle Mestery  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21 October 2015 at 09:53, Kyle Mestery  wrote:
>>>
 On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Armando M.  wrote:

>
>
> On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  wrote:
>
>> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
>>
>
> No, why would we?
>
>
 The reason to consider it is because Kuryr is a sub-project of Neutron,
 and they are doing their spec submissions following the Neutron guidelines.
 Adding the kuryr-core gerrit group to be on part with the *aas repos makes
 sense here. If other sub-projects (like L2FW, SFC, etc.) start doing spec
 reviews in the neutron-specs repository, then adding them makes sense too.

>>>
>>> I don't believe this is the road we set ourselves on when we started the
>>> decomp/stadium. We wanted a clear separation of concerns and I don't see
>>> how going down this path is going to help us achieve that.
>>>
>>> I don't see the grounds to have such an abrupt change in direction right
>>> now, especially for the level of work that that would imply and the
>>> pressure that would put on the drivers team. Anyone is free to review and
>>> contribute where it matters for them, and location should not prevent them
>>> from doing so.
>>>
>>>
>> I was merely implying that since these projects are part of neutron, and
>> they have specs, keeping them in one place makes sense. And by doing that,
>> we'd need to give them +2 powers for their core reviewers. But, I'm fine
>> with leaving things the way they are and having them put their specs in
>> their devref. But we should update the devref in Neutron to reflect this,
>> e.g. that we don't expect specs in neutron-specs for things outside
>> [neutron, neutron-fwaas, neutron-lbaas, neutron-vpnaas].
>>
>>
>
> IMO, it's pretty clear from here [1], which I revised in the context of
> [2]. Not sure if there's anything else that's left to misunderstanding.
>
>
I think this [1] helps to make it 100% clearer, at least to me.

[1] https://review.openstack.org/238190


> [1]
> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#neutron-specs-core-reviewer-team
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
>
>
>
>>

> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
>> think it would make sense to manage it
>> as part of Neutron spec process.
>>
>
> No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a
> reference for me to look at?
>
>
 See above, perhaps I answered this for you.

>>>

>
>> Any opinions on that?
>>
>> Gal.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M. 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
>>> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron 
>>> projects
>>> (core + *-aas).
>>>
>>> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2
>>> right was extended to all the core teams.
>>>
>>> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
>>> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
>>> project you're core of.
>>>
>>> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy
>>> and lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been
>>> made core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only
>>> within your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.
>>>
>>> Reviews are always welcome though!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Armando
>>>
>>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
>>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
>>> [3]
>>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards ,
>>
>> The G.
>>
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> 

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Kyle Mestery]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Armando M.  wrote:

>
>
> On 21 October 2015 at 09:53, Kyle Mestery  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Armando M.  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  wrote:
>>>
 Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?

>>>
>>> No, why would we?
>>>
>>>
>> The reason to consider it is because Kuryr is a sub-project of Neutron,
>> and they are doing their spec submissions following the Neutron guidelines.
>> Adding the kuryr-core gerrit group to be on part with the *aas repos makes
>> sense here. If other sub-projects (like L2FW, SFC, etc.) start doing spec
>> reviews in the neutron-specs repository, then adding them makes sense too.
>>
>
> I don't believe this is the road we set ourselves on when we started the
> decomp/stadium. We wanted a clear separation of concerns and I don't see
> how going down this path is going to help us achieve that.
>
> I don't see the grounds to have such an abrupt change in direction right
> now, especially for the level of work that that would imply and the
> pressure that would put on the drivers team. Anyone is free to review and
> contribute where it matters for them, and location should not prevent them
> from doing so.
>
>
I was merely implying that since these projects are part of neutron, and
they have specs, keeping them in one place makes sense. And by doing that,
we'd need to give them +2 powers for their core reviewers. But, I'm fine
with leaving things the way they are and having them put their specs in
their devref. But we should update the devref in Neutron to reflect this,
e.g. that we don't expect specs in neutron-specs for things outside
[neutron, neutron-fwaas, neutron-lbaas, neutron-vpnaas].


>
>>
>>> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
 think it would make sense to manage it
 as part of Neutron spec process.

>>>
>>> No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a
>>> reference for me to look at?
>>>
>>>
>> See above, perhaps I answered this for you.
>>
>
>>
>>>
 Any opinions on that?

 Gal.

 On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
> (core + *-aas).
>
> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right
> was extended to all the core teams.
>
> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
> project you're core of.
>
> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
> lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
> core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
> your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.
>
> Reviews are always welcome though!
>
> Cheers,
> Armando
>
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
> [3]
> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


 --
 Best Regards ,

 The G.


 __
 OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 Unsubscribe:
 openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> 

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Armando M.]

On 21 October 2015 at 09:53, Kyle Mestery  wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Armando M.  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  wrote:
>>
>>> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
>>>
>>
>> No, why would we?
>>
>>
> The reason to consider it is because Kuryr is a sub-project of Neutron,
> and they are doing their spec submissions following the Neutron guidelines.
> Adding the kuryr-core gerrit group to be on part with the *aas repos makes
> sense here. If other sub-projects (like L2FW, SFC, etc.) start doing spec
> reviews in the neutron-specs repository, then adding them makes sense too.
>

I don't believe this is the road we set ourselves on when we started the
decomp/stadium. We wanted a clear separation of concerns and I don't see
how going down this path is going to help us achieve that.

I don't see the grounds to have such an abrupt change in direction right
now, especially for the level of work that that would imply and the
pressure that would put on the drivers team. Anyone is free to review and
contribute where it matters for them, and location should not prevent them
from doing so.


>
>
>> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
>>> think it would make sense to manage it
>>> as part of Neutron spec process.
>>>
>>
>> No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a
>> reference for me to look at?
>>
>>
> See above, perhaps I answered this for you.
>

>
>>
>>> Any opinions on that?
>>>
>>> Gal.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>>>
 Hi folks,

 During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
 neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
 (core + *-aas).

 For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right
 was extended to all the core teams.

 Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
 project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
 project you're core of.

 If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
 lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
 core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
 your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.

 Reviews are always welcome though!

 Cheers,
 Armando

 [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
 [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
 [3]
 http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy


 __
 OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 Unsubscribe:
 openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards ,
>>>
>>> The G.
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Armando M.]

On 21 October 2015 at 09:52, Gal Sagie  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 21 October 2015 at 04:12, Gal Sagie  wrote:
>>
>>> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
>>>
>>
>> No, why would we?
>>
>
> [Gal] Because Kuryr is a special project which was created in order to
> expose Neutron and its services to containers networking,
>  its mission (at least as defined right now) is to bridge the gaps
> between containers networking world and Neutron and for doing it
>  it already depends on the feature/spec process of Neutron.
>  That is why it make sense to me that just like the services
> projects, our spec approval process will be handled
>  as part of Neutron.
>

Kuryr is no more special than any other Neutron affiliated project, let's
be 100% clear about that: there is no double-standard here.

If you really think that Kuryr should be an integral part of the Neutron
project, then it should not exist, but fold within Neutron entirely. I
don't know the backstory of why this was spun off as a separate project in
the first place, but I think that there's some merits in having it as
standalone entity.

You are always welcome to reach out for feedback, after all the same people
may work/have an interest in multiple projects (fingers stuck in many pies
if you will :P), but going from there to what you're proposing is too big
of a leap which I find hard to justify.


>
>
>
>>
>>
>>> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
>>> think it would make sense to manage it
>>> as part of Neutron spec process.
>>>
>>
>> No, unless what you are asking are changes to the core. Do you have a
>> reference for me to look at?
>>
>>
>   [Gal]   I dont understand what you mean "No" here, first this spec is
> sent to Mitaka:
>  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/213490/
>
> And as i mentioned above Kuryr spec process depends on Neutron
> (and the specs that are sent
> to Neutron core)
>

I'll review it and provide feedback. 'Depending on Neutron' means requiring
actual enhancement to the core platform that makes sense to be
tracked/discussed in Neutron. Everything else can be tracked independently:
this is the separation of concerns that we should strive for.


>
>
>>> Any opinions on that?
>>>
>>> Gal.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>>>
 Hi folks,

 During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
 neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
 (core + *-aas).

 For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right
 was extended to all the core teams.

 Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
 project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
 project you're core of.

 If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
 lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
 core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
 your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.

 Reviews are always welcome though!

 Cheers,
 Armando

 [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
 [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
 [3]
 http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy


 __
 OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 Unsubscribe:
 openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
 http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards ,
>>>
>>> The G.
>>>
>>>
>>> __
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards ,
>
> The G.
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Kyle Mestery]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Gal Sagie  wrote:

> Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
> We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I
> think it would make sense to manage it
> as part of Neutron spec process.
>
> Any opinions on that?
>
> I think this makes sense, and I'd be in favor of this.


> Gal.
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
>> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
>> (core + *-aas).
>>
>> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right was
>> extended to all the core teams.
>>
>> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
>> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
>> project you're core of.
>>
>> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
>> lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
>> core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
>> your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.
>>
>> Reviews are always welcome though!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Armando
>>
>> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
>> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
>> [3]
>> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>>
>> __
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards ,
>
> The G.
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Gal Sagie]

Do we also want to consider Project Kuryr part of this?
We already started sending Kuryr spec to the Neutron repository and I think
it would make sense to manage it
as part of Neutron spec process.

Any opinions on that?

Gal.

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Armando M.  wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
> neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
> (core + *-aas).
>
> For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right was
> extended to all the core teams.
>
> Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
> project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
> project you're core of.
>
> If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
> lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
> core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
> your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.
>
> Reviews are always welcome though!
>
> Cheers,
> Armando
>
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
> [3]
> http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
Best Regards ,

The G.
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

[Armando M.]

Hi folks,

During revision of the Neutron teams [1], we made clear that the
neutron-specs repo is to be targeted by specs for all the Neutron projects
(core + *-aas).

For this reason I made sure that the neutron-specs-core team +2 right was
extended to all the core teams.

Be mindful, use your +2 rights with care: if you are core on a *-aas
project, you should exercise that vote only for specs that pertain the
project you're core of.

If I could use this email as a reminder also of the core hierarchy and
lieutenant system we switched to in Liberty ([3]): if you have been made
core by a lieutenant of a sub-system, please use your +2/+A only within
your area of comfort and reach out for help if in doubt.

Reviews are always welcome though!

Cheers,
Armando

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237180/
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/314,members
[3]
http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/policies/neutron-teams.html#core-review-hierarchy
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev