Hi, Carlos The etherpad for release B looks good and I think we should continue using it.
On the working items, personally I don't think JIRA is a good system for storing the spec for some reasons. 1. it is difficult to comment inline in JIRA issues 2. it is difficult to track the change history of a spec in JIRA 3. it is difficult to publish approved working items to a document from JIRA Last but not least, contributors visits JIRA less often than gerrit, at least on my side... We don't have to force a strict rule to approve a working item, but we need a convenient tool to discuss about it. And I prefer to keep the spec close to the source code so they won't deviate too much from each other. These are my starting point to propose gerrit instead of JIRA for specs. Open for comments :-) -- Yujun On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 4:34 PM Carlos Goncalves <carlos.goncal...@neclab.eu> wrote: > We’ve been using etherpad, weekly meeting and F2F team meetings for > brainstorming. The team even strives to plan and align public presentations > (e.g. OpenStack and OPNFV Summit events). > > > Examples: > > https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/doctor > > https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/doctor_use_case_for_b_release > > https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/doctor_meetings > > > > Due to large communities in e.g. Neutron and Nova, those projects felt the > need to stricter the reviewing process of work item proposals. I think > Doctor is not at that level, at least just yet. I believe we’re just fine > with the tools and flows we’ve been using so far, including JIRA. Unless we > have a compelling reason to change our workflow, I would suggest keeping as > is. > > > > I am open for suggestions/comments. > > > > Carlos > > > > *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto: > opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *Yujun Zhang > *Sent:* 07 September 2016 09:00 > *To:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV > *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] How to propose topics for > D-release > > > > This topic was raised in the last meeting but one [1] which I was absent > from. I'm not sure if there is any conclusion out. > > > > Here are my proposals. Please feel free to comment > > 1. using etherpad for brainstorming, since it is lightweight and real > time > 2. submit detail proposals to gerrit for review like openstack > blueprint [2] > 3. track status of the approved spec in JIRA > > [1] > http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-doctor/2016/opnfv-doctor.2016-08-30-13.01.html > > [2] > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints#Spec_.2B_Blueprints_lifecycle >
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
