On 04/11/2016 05:33 PM, Ben Nemec wrote:
On 04/11/2016 04:54 AM, John Trowbridge wrote:
Hola OOOers,
It came up in the meeting last week that we could benefit from a CI
subteam with its own meeting, since CI is taking up a lot of the main
meeting time.
I like this idea, and think we should do something similar for the other
informal subteams (tripleoclient, UI), and also add a new subteam for
tripleo-quickstart (and maybe one for releases?).
We should make seperate ACL's for these subteams as well. The informal
approach of adding cores who can +2 anything but are told to only +2
what they know doesn't scale very well.
How so? Are we planning to give people +2 even though we don't trust
them to not +2 things they shouldn't? I remain of the opinion that if
we need ACL controls to keep someone from doing something then they
shouldn't have +2 in the first place.
Quickstart is a bit of a weird case because the regular contributors to
it have not previously been very involved in TripleO upstream so I don't
think most of us have enough context to know whether they should have
+2. I guess the UI would fall under the same category, so I'd be in
favor of keeping those two separate, but otherwise I think we're
creating bureaucracy for its own sake.
FWIW it works pretty well for the ironic-inspector-core subteam of the
big ironic-core.
-Ben
__________________________________________________________________________
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
