[openstack-dev] [Glance] Open glance-drivers to all glance-cores
kuvaja at hp.com
Mon Apr 20 19:34:02 UTC 2015
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:flavio at redhat.com]
> Sent: 20 April 2015 15:04
> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: [openstack-dev] [Glance] Open glance-drivers to all glance-cores
> Hello Glance folks, and not Glance folks :D
> Here's a thought. I believe, based on the size of our
> project/community/reviewers team, we should just give access to all glance-
> cores to glance-drivers. Few considerations:
> 1) Many of our reviewers have been part of Glance even before I became
> part of it. It just makes no sense to me that these folks that have put efforts,
> time and that have helped making Glance what it is today don't have a voice
> on the specs. Commenting seems to not be enough, apparently.
> 2) I'd like to encourage a more open communication in our specs review
> process and including all our current *code* reviewers seems like a good
> step forward towards that. Things that I'd love to thing and to avoid are:
> - I'd love to avoid all kind of private emails/conversations. Specs
> can either be discussed in the review (which is what it's for),
> team meetings or mailing list.
> - I'd love for specs to get more attention from other folks. In
> other words, I'd like to scale our specs review process. There are
> specs that have sitten there for a bit.
> - Our *code* reviewers know Glance's code, I want them to have a way
> to express a stronger opinion/vote.
> 3) Although this doesn't seem to work for other projects, I believe Glance is
> not such a big community for this to fail. If anything, it should help us to
> manage the load a bit better. If there are core-reviewers that simply don't
> want to do spec reviews, that's fine.
> 4) If there are non-core reviewers that want to be part of the glance-drivers
> team then we can vote as we do for new cores. I have to admit that I'm
> having a hard time to imagine a case like this but...
> who knows? right?
> 5) It used to be like this and many of us just found themselves out of the
> glance-drivers team without notice. It's probably an unexpected side effect
> of disconnecting LP/gerrit and splitting the teams. Not a big deal, but...
> Flavio Percoco
Thanks for your trust towards us. While I think this is great gesture (specially towards us new members) I do not think this is exactly the "safest" option at the moment. We have had active discussion and steep learning curve to the specs over past cycle and I think we need to sort that out first. Second concern I have is that looking our core-reviewers now, we are actually fairly young group since the last flush (give or take half of us have been even core less than a year).
I will jump bit around on this so please try to hang on. For your point 3) I do agree. I think we can get there fairly soon if that is what people wants, but as mentioned I'd like to get our processes cleared first.
I'd like to address points 4 and 5 on single hit and _if_ we in future include whole core in the drivers we keep the drivers group still separated and individual members to that group nominated on similar open manner as we do for our cores.
Now last but not least to your point 2) (sorry, I have really no input on 1)). I do strongly agree with you on this. As the specs are supposed to be not just an overview of the proposed functionality but also touched quite deeply to the technical aspects and as you pointed out that would be great to engage more of the code folks to the specs, there would be room for stronger opinion.
What I would propose as alternative instead of including glance-core to glance-drivers would be change in the acls of the glance-specs repo. How about we give -2..+2 vote to glance-core & glance-drivers and keep the workflow +1 on glance-drivers only? This would give us stronger say on the direction but would keep the decision of taking the spec out of review (merge) on the drivers until we can figure out/agree and _document_ how we are going to process the specs.
Erno "Meeting-the-half-way" Kuvaja ;)
More information about the OpenStack-dev