On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 5:54 AM, John Trowbridge <tr...@redhat.com> 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. > +1 to subteams for selected projects. I think there should be a clearly defined practice of ensuring there is enough reviewers so that a subteam core doesn't need to +A their own patches. I don't know if that's a standing rule in tripleo core, but I think it should be explicit in subteams. -r > - trown > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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
