Thanks Duncan and also Dolph, I should have made the question broader. :-)
On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 13:22 +0100, Duncan Thomas wrote: > On 16 July 2014 03:57, Jay S. Bryant <jsbry...@electronicjungle.net> wrote: > > John, > > > > So you have said a few times that the specs are a learning process. > > What do you feel with have learned thus far using specs? > > I'm not John, but I'm going to answer as if you'd addressed the question > wider: > - Specs can definitely help flesh out ideas and are much better than > blueprints as a way of tracking concerns, questions, etc > I feel I have better knowledge of what is being worked thanks to the specs. This may partially be because I was also involved from the summit on for the first time. They definitely are better for fleshing out ideas and discussing concerns. > - We as a community are rather shy about making decisions as > individuals, even low risk ones like 'Does this seem to require a > spec' - if there doesn't seem to be value in a spec, don't do one > unless somebody asks for one Agreed. I think we all need to be less shy about making decisions and voicing them. At least in Cinder. :-) > > - Not all questions can be answered at spec time, sometimes you need > to go bash out some code to see what works, then circle again > > - Careful planning reduces velocity. No significant evidence either > way as to whether it improves quality, but my gut feeling is that it > does. We need to figure out what tradeoffs on either scale we're happy > to make, and perhaps that answer is different based on the area of > code being touched and the date (e.g. a change that doesn't affect > external APIs in J-1 might need less careful planning than a change in > J-3. API changes or additions need more discussion and eyes on than > none-API changes) I think, through this development cycle we are starting to narrow down what really needs a spec. I think it would be good to perhaps have a Lessons Learned session at the K summit on the specs and try to better define expectations for use in the future. I feel it has slowed, or at least focused development. That has been good. > > - Specs are terrible for tracking work items, but no worse than blueprints > Agreed. > - Multiple people might choose to work on the same blueprint in > parallel - this is going to happen, isn't necessarily rude and the > correct solution to competing patches is entirely subjective _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev