[openstack-dev] [Nova] The unbearable lightness of specs
ndipanov at redhat.com
Thu Jun 25 08:39:00 UTC 2015
On 06/24/2015 10:17 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy <kchamart at redhat.com
> <mailto:kchamart at redhat.com>> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:02:27AM -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> > On 6/24/2015 9:09 AM, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote:
> > >On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 02:51:38PM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> > >>On 06/24/2015 02:33 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> [. . .]
> > >This is one of the _baffling_ aspects -- that a so-called "super core"
> > >has to approve specs with *no* obvious valid reasons. As Jay Pipes
> > >mentioned once, this indeed seems like a vestigial remnant from old
> > >times.
> > >
> > >FWIW, I agree with others on this thread, Nova should get rid of this
> > >specific senseless non-process. At least a couple of cycles ago.
> > Specs were only added a couple of cycles ago... :) And they were added to
> > fill a gap, which has already been pointed out in this thread. So if we
> > remove them without a replacement for that gap, we regress.
> Oops, I didn't mean to say that "Specs" as a concept should be gone.
> Sorr for poor phrasing.
> My question was answred by Joe Gordon with this review:
> A bit more context:
> We discussed the very issue of adjusting the review rules for nova-specs
> to give all cores +2 power. But in the end we decided not to in the end.
I was expecting to also read a "why" here, since I was not at the summit.
> As someone who does a lot of spec reviews, I take +1s from the right
> people (not always nova-cores) to mean a lot, so much that I regularly
> will simply skim the spec myself before +2ing it. If a subject matter
> expert who I trust +1s a spec, that is usually all I need.
> * +1/-1s from the right people have a lot of power on specs. So the
> review burden isn't just on the people with '+W' power. We may not have
> done a great job of making this point clear.
> * There are many subject matter experts outside nova-core who's vote
> means a lot. For example PTL's of other projects the spec impacts.
This is exactly the kind of cognitive dissonance I find hard to not get
upset about :)
Code is what matters ultimately - the devil _is_ in the details, and I
can bet you that it is extremely unlikely that a PTL of any other
project is also going to go and do a detailed review of a feature branch
in Nova, and have the understanding of the state of the surrounding
codebase needed to do it properly. That's what's up to the nova
reviewers to deal with. I too wish Nova code was in a place where it was
possible to just do "architecture", but I think we all agree it's
nowhere near that.
With all due respect to you Joe (and I do have a lot of respect for you)
- I can't get behind how Nova specs puts process and documents over
working and maintainable code. I will never be able to get behind that!
I honestly think Nova is today worse off then it could have been, just
because of that mindset. You can't "process" away the hard things in
More information about the OpenStack-dev