Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Moving to a formal design process

2014-05-26 Thread Devananda van der Veen
The specs repo is now available here: https://github.com/openstack/ironic-specs Reviews for specs can be found here: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/ironic-specs,n,z I've updated all Ironic's blueprints on Launchpad to definition: new and direction: needs approval. Please

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Moving to a formal design process

2014-05-19 Thread Devananda van der Veen
Added - https://github.com/devananda/ironic-specs/commit/7f34f353332ad5b26830dadc8c9f870df399feb7 On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 6:13 PM, Robert Collins robe...@robertcollins.netwrote: I'd like to suggest two things. Firstly a section on scale (as opposed to performance). Secondly, I'd like to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Moving to a formal design process

2014-05-19 Thread Russell Haering
+1 to this process, and I think the template is pretty reasonable. One thing to call out maybe, is are there any known failure scenarios? If so, why shouldn't they block the spec? On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 5:51 PM, Devananda van der Veen devananda@gmail.com wrote: Added -

[openstack-dev] [Ironic] Moving to a formal design process

2014-05-18 Thread Devananda van der Veen
Hi all, As with several other projects, and as discussed at the summit, Ironic is moving to a formal / specs-based design process. The reasons for this have been well summarized in previous email threads in other projects [*], but in short, it's because, until now, nearly all our blueprints

Re: [openstack-dev] [Ironic] Moving to a formal design process

2014-05-18 Thread Robert Collins
I'd like to suggest two things. Firstly a section on scale (as opposed to performance). Secondly, I'd like to see additional hard requirements that will be added to drivers called out (e.g. a 'Driver Impact' section). -Rob On 19 May 2014 10:03, Devananda van der Veen devananda@gmail.com