Open Stack

On 14 July 2014 07:11, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
> I almost fully agree with this last point. The bit I don't agree with is
> that there are some small refactor changes that aim to change a core
> piece of the project without any impact on the final user that are
> spec/blueprint worthy to explaining the motivation, expected results and
> drawbacks.
>
> To put it in another way. Developers are consumers of project's code,
> therefore the changes affecting the way developers interact with the
> code are also blueprint worth it, IMHO.

The way I've been playing it on cinder is to ask for a spec if I'm
reviewing a patch that doesn't have one and I find myself questioning
the approach rather than the code.

I think it is fair to say that core reviewers shouldn't be afraid to
ask for a spec at any time they think it will help, guidelines aside.
This allows contributors to attempt the lightweight process and skip
the spec if they don't expect to need one.


-- 
Duncan Thomas