Discussing at the meet-up if fine with me > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Still [mailto:mi...@stillhq.com] > Sent: 25 June 2014 00:48 > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Timeline for the rest of the Juno release > > Your comments are fair. I think perhaps at this point we should defer > discussion of the further away deadlines until the mid cycle meetup -- that > will give us a chance to whiteboard the flow for that period of the release. > > Or do you really want to lock this down now? > > Michael > > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Day, Phil <philip....@hp.com> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Russell Bryant [mailto:rbry...@redhat.com] > >> Sent: 24 June 2014 13:08 > >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Timeline for the rest of the Juno > >> release > >> > >> On 06/24/2014 07:35 AM, Michael Still wrote: > >> > Phil -- I really want people to focus their efforts on fixing bugs > >> > in that period was the main thing. The theory was if we encouraged > >> > people to work on specs for the next release, then they'd be > >> > distracted from fixing the bugs we need fixed in J. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Michael > >> > > >> > On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:08 PM, Day, Phil <philip....@hp.com> wrote: > >> >> Hi Michael, > >> >> > >> >> Not sure I understand the need for a gap between "Juno Spec > >> >> approval > >> freeze" (Jul 10th) and "K opens for spec proposals" (Sep 4th). I can > >> understand that K specs won't get approved in that period, and may > >> not get much feedback from the cores - but I don't see the harm in > >> letting specs be submitted to the K directory for early review / feedback > during that period ? > >> > >> I agree with both of you. Priorities need to be finishing up J, but > >> I don't see any reason not to let people post K specs whenever. > >> Expectations just need to be set appropriately that it may be a while > >> before they get reviewed/approved. > >> > > Exactly - I think it's reasonable to set the expectation that the > > focus of those that can produce/review code will be elsewhere - but > > that shouldn't stop some small effort going into knocking the rough > > corners off the specs at the same time > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev