Josh,
We did have the discussion at summit. We aren't even going to have a "big
spec". We are going to run as bare minimal of a spec as possible. The
reason I brought up spec additions is because Kolla has become so large,
managing the project using current techniques is not optimal. I don't
Something for consideration to make the specs process not to painful and
one that I think (?) glance pioneered is to have a 'bigger spec' and a
'smaller spec' template.
https://github.com/openstack/glance-specs/blob/master/specs/lite-specs.rst
(smaller)
+1 I agree
2016-07-12 13:55 GMT-03:00 Paul Bourke :
> Sounds reasonable +1
>
>
> On 12/07/16 15:32, Michał Jastrzębski wrote:
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> Since our project matured, we decided that we should have a discussion
>> regarding our spec process.
>>
>>
Sounds reasonable +1
On 12/07/16 15:32, Michał Jastrzębski wrote:
Hey guys,
Since our project matured, we decided that we should have a discussion
regarding our spec process.
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kolla-N-midcycle-specs
Currently we do specs for most critical things, and they
One thing Michal left out is we are not planning to make this change until
we branch Newton, assuming there is a majority vote reached.
As typical, voting will remain open for one week until either a majority
has been reached or the time has expired. The deadline to vote is Tuesday
19th of July.
On Jul 12, 2016 8:04 PM, "Michał Jastrzębski" wrote:
>
> Hey guys,
>
> Since our project matured, we decided that we should have a discussion
> regarding our spec process.
>
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kolla-N-midcycle-specs
>
> Currently we do specs for most critical
Hey guys,
Since our project matured, we decided that we should have a discussion
regarding our spec process.
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kolla-N-midcycle-specs
Currently we do specs for most critical things, and they require majority vote.
We want to introduce another way, to enable