Top-posting since I am writing this as summary email, with some (very)
rough proposals on improvements going forward (*)
* Specs have a number of positives that we should not discount:
** Absolutely necessary to sign off on the idea and direction before
writing code
** Serve as a way for
On 06/29/2015 11:32 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Nikola Đipanov wrote:
It's not only about education - I think Gerrit is the wrong medium to
have a design discussion and do design work. Maybe you disagree as you
seem to imply that it worked well in some cases?
I've recently seen on more than a
Nikola Đipanov wrote:
It's not only about education - I think Gerrit is the wrong medium to
have a design discussion and do design work. Maybe you disagree as you
seem to imply that it worked well in some cases?
I've recently seen on more than a few cases how a spec review can
easily spiral
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 4:32 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org
wrote:
Nikola Đipanov wrote:
It's not only about education - I think Gerrit is the wrong medium to
have a design discussion and do design work. Maybe you disagree as you
seem to imply that it worked well in some cases?
On 06/26/2015 08:15 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
Limiting those who give input to the people who can analyse python and
determine the impacts of the change has significant risks. Many of those
running OpenStack clouds can give their feedback as part of the specs
process. While this may not be as
:
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org]
Sent: 26 June 2015 16:42
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
On 2015-06-25 16:39:56 + (+), Tim Bell wrote
https://bugs.launchpad.net/stackalytics/+bug/1469368 submitted.
Tim
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org]
Sent: 26 June 2015 23:16
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable
+1 also
Original Message
From: Fox, Kevin M
Sent: Friday, 26 June 2015 21:15
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Reply To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
+1
questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
+1
From: Tim Bell [tim.b...@cern.ch]
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 12:26 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova
On 06/25/2015 05:39 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
On 25/06/15 09:49, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Maxim Nestratov wrote:
24.06.2015 20:21, Daniel P. Berrange пишет:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:46:57PM +, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
First: Overhead
- 1 week for vacation
- 1 week
On 2015-06-25 16:39:56 + (+), Tim Bell wrote:
[...]
One of the problems that I’ve seen is with specs etiquette where
people -1 because they have a question. This is a question of
education rather than a fundamental issue with the process.
+1
From: Tim Bell [tim.b...@cern.ch]
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2015 12:26 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy
On 2015-06-26 19:26:57 + (+), Tim Bell wrote:
I also feel that stackalytics should credit people of a 0 review
comment on specs. Currently, I think that only non-zero reviews
are considered as a contribution. My understanding of the workflow
is that a 0 is in many cases is the
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org]
Sent: 26 June 2015 16:42
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
On 2015-06-25 16:39:56 + (+), Tim Bell wrote
-Original Message-
From: Nikola Đipanov [mailto:ndipa...@redhat.com]
Sent: 26 June 2015 18:34
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
On 06/25/2015 05:39 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
On 25/06/15 09:49, Thierry Carrez
On 06/25/2015 09:46 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com
As someone who does a lot of spec reviews, I take +1s from the right
people (not always nova-cores) to mean a lot, so much that I regularly
will simply skim the
On 26 June 2015 at 11:19, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/25/2015 09:46 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com
As someone who does a lot of spec reviews, I take +1s from the right
people (not always nova-cores) to
-To: OpenStack List
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Thursday, June 25, 2015 at 2:58 PM
To: OpenStack List
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
I've
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/24/2015 04:41 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
We currently have the fast track process, where if a spec was
previously approved we will quickly re-approve it. (I do a git diff
between the previous version and make sure the diff is trivial). By
my
Apologies to go back in time in this thread, but I feel like I should
respond directly to this original email...
On 24 June 2015 at 11:28, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work!
In many
I've repeatedly stated that the fact that we created an even smaller
clique of people to approve specs (nova-drivers which is a tiny subset
of the already fr too small nova-core) is madness, as it creates
an even worse review burden on them, and thus worsens the bottleneck
than we
25.06.2015 14:58, Sergey Nikitin пишет:
I've repeatedly stated that the fact that we created an
even smaller
clique of people to approve specs (nova-drivers which is a
tiny subset
of the already fr too small nova-core) is madness,
window is a very
long time for that.
Thanks,
Kevin
From: Maxim Nestratov
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 11:58:20 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
24.06.2015 20:21, Daniel P. Berrange пишет
On 06/24/2015 03:42 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate good design happening,
if anything they prevent
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:
On 06/24/2015 10:17 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com
mailto:kcham...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:02:27AM -0500, Matt Riedemann
On 25 June 2015 at 09:49, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Maxim Nestratov wrote:
24.06.2015 20:21, Daniel P. Berrange пишет:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:46:57PM +, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
First: Overhead
- 1 week for vacation
- 1 week for holidays.
- 4 weeks for feature
On 25 June 2015 at 09:58, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Joe Gordon wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Ed Leafe e...@leafe.com
mailto:e...@leafe.com wrote:
[...]
Other emails have touched on the biggest disconnect in the process: that
an approved spec magically becomes
On 25/06/15 09:49, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
Maxim Nestratov wrote:
24.06.2015 20:21, Daniel P. Berrange пишет:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:46:57PM +, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
First: Overhead
- 1 week for vacation
- 1 week for holidays.
- 4 weeks for feature freeze.
On 06/24/2015 10:17 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com
mailto:kcham...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:02:27AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 6/24/2015 9:09 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
On
Maxim Nestratov wrote:
24.06.2015 20:21, Daniel P. Berrange пишет:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:46:57PM +, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
First: Overhead
- 1 week for vacation
- 1 week for holidays.
- 4 weeks for feature freeze.
- 4 weeks of pre-summit roadmap planning.
- 1 week of summit.
Joe Gordon wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Ed Leafe e...@leafe.com
mailto:e...@leafe.com wrote:
[...]
Other emails have touched on the biggest disconnect in the process: that
an approved spec magically becomes unapproved on a particular calendar
date. This makes no sense
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate good design happening,
if anything they prevent it. The process layered on top with only a
minority (!) of cores being able to approve them, yet they are a prereq
of
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate good design happening,
if anything they prevent it. The process layered on top with only a
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Ed Leafe e...@leafe.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/24/2015 08:38 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
I urge people to reply to this instead of my original email as the
writing is more detailed and balanced.
OK, I've read what
On 06/24/2015 08:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate good design happening,
if anything they prevent
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy kcham...@redhat.com
wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:02:27AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 6/24/2015 9:09 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 02:51:38PM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 06/24/2015 02:33 PM, Matt
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 06/24/2015 03:23 PM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui wrote:
I do not consider specs don't work, personnaly I refer myself to
this relatively good documentation [1] instead of to dig in code
to remember how work a feature early introduced.
I think
On 06/24/2015 01:42 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate good design happening,
if anything they
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 02:51:38PM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 06/24/2015 02:33 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
[. . .]
I agree completely. The nicely rendered feature docs which is a
byproduct of the specs process in gerrit is a great part of it. So when
someone is trying to use a new
On 06/24/2015 03:08 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
Why do cores need approved specs for example - and indeed for many of us
- it's just a dance we do. I refuse to believe that a core can be
trusted to approve patches but not to write any code other than a bugfix
without a written document explaining
On 6/24/2015 7:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate good design happening,
if anything they prevent
On 6/24/2015 8:23 AM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate good design happening,
if anything they
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate good design happening,
if anything they prevent it. The process layered on top with only a
Why do cores need approved specs for example - and indeed for many of us
- it's just a dance we do. I refuse to believe that a core can be
trusted to approve patches but not to write any code other than a bugfix
without a written document explaining themselves, and then have a yet
more
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:09:16PM +0200, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 02:51:38PM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 06/24/2015 02:33 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
[. . .]
I agree completely. The nicely rendered feature docs which is a
byproduct of the specs process in
On 06/24/2015 06:42 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
I also think the way we couple spec approval reviews to the dev
cycles is counterproductive. We should be willing to accept and
review specs at any point in any cycle, and once approved they should
remain valid for a prolonged period of time - not
On 6/24/2015 9:09 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 02:51:38PM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 06/24/2015 02:33 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
[. . .]
I agree completely. The nicely rendered feature docs which is a
byproduct of the specs process in gerrit is a great part of
On 06/24/2015 02:33 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 6/24/2015 8:23 AM, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to
On 06/24/2015 04:42 PM, Andrew Laski wrote:
On 06/24/15 at 02:38pm, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 06/24/2015 01:42 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and
clarity:
TL/DR: I think the original poster is simply frustrated with how long it
takes to go from spec to landed feature. How about we stop talking about
whether specs are good or not (I think everyone agrees that they are
beneficial), and try to actually make the process better?
And by make it better, I
On 06/24/15 at 02:38pm, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 06/24/2015 01:42 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:28:59AM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
Hey Nova,
I'll cut to the chase and keep this email short for brevity and clarity:
Specs don't work! They do nothing to facilitate
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:02:27AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
On 6/24/2015 9:09 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 02:51:38PM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
On 06/24/2015 02:33 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
[. . .]
This is one of the _baffling_ aspects -- that a so-called
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 06/24/2015 08:38 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
I urge people to reply to this instead of my original email as the
writing is more detailed and balanced.
OK, I've read what others have written, and want to throw in my own
0.8316 BTC.
The
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:46:57PM +, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 6:30 AM Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
wrote:
There is the openstack-specs repo for cross-project specs:
http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/openstack-specs/
That'd be a good
24.06.2015 20:21, Daniel P. Berrange пишет:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 04:46:57PM +, Michael Krotscheck wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 6:30 AM Matt Riedemann mrie...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
wrote:
There is the openstack-specs repo for cross-project specs:
55 matches
Mail list logo
