Open Stack

On 10/28/2013 11:35 AM, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
> On 10/23/2013 08:33 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>> At the last Nova meeting we started talking about some updates to the
>> Nova blueprint process for the Icehouse cycle.  I had hoped we could
>> talk about and finalize this in a Nova design summit session on "Nova
>> Project Structure and Process" [1], but I think we need to push forward
>> on finalizing this as soon as possible so that it doesn't block current
>> work being done.
> 
> I understand the need for speed here and I would like to help make sure
> that any change is effectively communicated to the wider community at
> this very busy time of the year.
> 
> Since it's very dangerous to assume that everybody reads the mailing
> list, I would suggest writing a blog post on openstack.org/blog and a
> feature in the weekly newsletter is the bare minimum we can do. I'll nag
> you on IRC if I have questions.
> 
> I think I have most of the information on this message except it's not
> clear to me "why" you are proposing to review the process: can you
> sumamrize please?

There are two motivating factors for revising and clarifying the
blueprint process for Nova right now:

1) Scaling operations in the Nova project.  The rapid growth has taken
us past the point where one person (the PTL) can not handle all of the
leadership tasks alone.  I wanted to clearly communicate that a well
trusted team of people would be responsible for reviewing and approving
blueprints.

2) Setting clearer expectations.  Since we have so many blueprints for
Nova, I feel it's very important to accurately set expectations for how
the priority of different projects compare.  In the last cycle,
priorities were mainly subjectively set by me.  Setting priorities based
on what reviewers are willing to spend time on is a more accurate
reflection of the likelihood of a set of changes making it in to the
release.

>> 2) Blueprint Review Team
> [...]
> 
> Do you think users can get involved at this point to give their input?
> Or where would you see users getting the chance to give feedback about
> features they'd need to be implemented?

User input into the roadmap isn't necessarily affected by these updates,
but it's a good question.

We don't really have a specific system for filing feature requests.
Blueprints are certainly not a good tool for that.  Launchpad bugs can
be given a priority of "Wishlist", which is what we typically do if a
feature request comes in as a bug.

I think the best way to influence the roadmap is to just participate in
the community.  Discuss ideas on the mailing lists, attend meetups and
conferences, write blog posts, and generally communicate about the
challenges faced and what would make OpenStack better for you.

As for blueprint reviews, these things are regularly discussed on the
openstack-dev list.  That's the best place for anyone to jump in with
input on specific things being worked on.

With my Red Hat on, I think this is an area where OpenStack vendors are
able to add some value.  If users don't necessarily have the time or
interest in navigating and participating in all of this process, they
should be communicating their needs to their vendor.  The vendors are
then representing the interests of their customers in the community.

With that said, I absolutely want anyone and everyone interested in
participating able to do so.

-- 
Russell Bryant