Open Stack

On 2014-03-06 18:16, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Mar 2014 13:05:15 -0500
> Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:
>> In today's Nova meeting a new thought occurred. We already have Gerrit
>> which is good for reviewing things. It gives you detailed commenting
>> abilities, voting, and history. Instead of attempting (and usually
>> failing) on doing blueprint review in launchpad (or launchpad + an
>> etherpad, or launchpad + a wiki page) we could do something like
>> follows:
>> 
>> 1. create bad blueprint
>> 2. create gerrit review with detailed proposal on the blueprint
>> 3. iterate in gerrit working towards blueprint approval
>> 4. once approved copy back the approved text into the blueprint (which
>> should now be sufficiently detailed)
>> 
> 
> +1. I think this could really help avoid wasted work for API related
> changes in particular.
> 
> Just wondering if we need step 4 - or if the blueprint text should
> always just link to either the unapproved patch for the text in
> gerrit, or the text in repository once it's approved. Updates to
> proposal would be proposed through the same process.
> 
> Chris

It makes sense to me to have whatever was approved in Gerrit be the 
canonical version.  Copy-pasting back to launchpad seems error prone.  
IIRC, blueprints have a field for a link to the spec, so maybe we should 
just link to the Gerrit content with that?

It would be nice to have a bot that can update bp status and such when a 
change is approved in Gerrit, but that's something that can happen in 
the future.

-Ben