I believe this model polarizes the community a bit as far as picking reviews go.We voted to remove it in Mitaka and I was hoping we would workout a way to bring the community together in the Glare reviews.My goal is to have champions for each module that is being worked on in Newton (import, micro-versions, glare, documentation, etc) . This does have a little bit of effect in creating tribal knowledge but we do have that even today. The iterative plan though (yet to be formalized) is that we need some sort of knowledge sharing model. I have been trying to do that using the dedicated Glare meetings but we may need other models of KT (knowledge transfer) here.
++ I did the dedicated teams in Mitaka without formalizing it as I prefer there to be one Glance team for as much as we can and just do some focalized reviews. I agree we need to move Glare forward and it's awesome there's so much work on it. I'm sorry I don't have a suggestion as far as transfering Glare's knowledge goes. I'd probably recommend lots of docs and more public discussions for now but other folks will have to dedicate time on reading the API and service to become more familiar with it. Thanks for clarifying, Nikhil! Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
