On 04/15/2014 11:44 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
I've been watching the nova process, and I think its working out well
- it certainly addresses:
- making design work visible
- being able to tell who has had input
- and providing clear feedback to the designers
I'd like to do the same thing for TripleO this cycle..
++
I'm thinking we can just add docs to incubator, since thats already a
repository separate to our production code - what do folk think?
In the current nova-specs thread on the ML, Tim Bell says:
"I think that there is also a need to verify the user story aspect. One
of the great things with the ability to subscribe to nova-specs is that
the community can give input early, when we can check on the need and
the approach. I know from the CERN team how the requirements need to be
reviewed early, not after the code has been written."
Which is great. I'm mentioning it because he calls out the ability to
subscribe to nova-specs.
I think if you put them in incubator, then people who are wanting to
fill a role like Tim - subscribing as an operator and validating user
stories - might be a bit muddied by patches to other thigns. (although
thanks for having a thought about less repos :) )
So I'd just vote, for whatever my vote is worth, for a tripleo-specs repo.
Monty
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
