On 25 June 2015 at 10:19, Daniel P. Berrange berra...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 06:30:06PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 17:25 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:52:37AM -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:28 AM, Nikola
On 06/24/2015 09:00 PM, Adam Young wrote:
On 06/24/2015 12:25 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Which happened repeatedly. You could say that
the first patch submitted to the code repository should simply be a doc
file addition, that describes the feature proposal and we should discuss
that
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 06:30:06PM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 17:25 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:52:37AM -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:28 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Gerrit and our spec template are a horrible tool for
On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 17:25 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:52:37AM -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:28 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Gerrit and our spec template are a horrible tool for
discussing design.
This is the heart of the problem.
I think
On 06/24/2015 06:28 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Gerrit and our spec template are a horrible tool for
discussing design.
This is the heart of the problem.
I think that a proper RFE description in the bug tracker is the best
place to start. Not a design of the solution, but a statement of the
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:52:37AM -0400, Adam Young wrote:
On 06/24/2015 06:28 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Gerrit and our spec template are a horrible tool for
discussing design.
This is the heart of the problem.
I think that a proper RFE description in the bug tracker is the best place
On 06/24/2015 12:25 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
Which happened repeatedly. You could say that
the first patch submitted to the code repository should simply be a doc
file addition, that describes the feature proposal and we should discuss
that before then submitting code patches, but then
