For reference, I proposed a review which does this for nova last
night: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/122109/
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Aaron Rosen wrote:
> I agree as well. I think moving them to an unimplemented folder makes sense
> and would be helpful in reviewing if one re-proposes
I agree as well. I think moving them to an unimplemented folder makes sense
and would be helpful in reviewing if one re-proposes a blueprint.
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 09/15/2014 10:01 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> > Some of the specs had a significant amount of det
014 10:07 AM
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] keep old
specs
>
> Some of the specs had a significant amount of detail and thought put
> into them. It seems like a waste to bury them in a git tree history.
> By having them in a place where external parties
(e.g. operators)
&
On 09/15/2014 10:01 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> Some of the specs had a significant amount of detail and thought put
> into them. It seems like a waste to bury them in a git tree history.
>
> By having them in a place where external parties (e.g. operators) can
> easily find them, they could get mor
Some of the specs had a significant amount of detail and thought put into
them. It seems like a waste to bury them in a git tree history.
By having them in a place where external parties (e.g. operators) can
easily find them, they could get more visibility and feedback for any
future revisions. Ju
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Kevin Benton wrote:
> I saw that the specs that didn't make the deadline for the feature freeze
> were removed from the tree completely.[1] For easier reference, can we
> instead revert that commit to restore them and then move them into a release
> specific folder
I saw that the specs that didn't make the deadline for the feature freeze
were removed from the tree completely.[1] For easier reference, can we
instead revert that commit to restore them and then move them into a
release specific folder called 'unimplemented' or something along those
lines?
It wi
