[openstack-dev] [searchlight] Feature request and bug workflow

McLellan, Steven steve.mclellan at hpe.com
Wed Nov 11 22:33:43 UTC 2015


I've already spoken to you about this and I think everyone would agree
that for large features blueprints are cumbersome; my preference would be
for simple blueprints (uncontroversial and straightforward from a design
perspective) to leave a full description in launchpad but for larger ones
to link to a review (and possibly update launchpad once the feature's been
agreed upon). The admin indexing work is one that would benefit from
having reviews in gerrit.

Steve

On 11/11/15, 12:50 PM, "Tripp, Travis S" <travis.tripp at hpe.com> wrote:

>Searchlighters,
>
>When we began this project, we had many discussions about process and
>made a conscious decision to support as lightweight of a workflow for
>feature requests as possible. We all discussed how we want to encourage
>contribution from everybody by supporting both developers and
>non-developers who want to provide input, requests for features, and bug
>fixes. Specifically, we decided that we did not want to immediately use a
>separate spec repo and to try to better incorporate our normal
>documentation repo into the feature request process whenever Launchpad
>didn¹t meet our needs.
>
>We did not formally document any of the above, mostly because we didn¹t
>have time in Liberty, but also because the concept was still a little
>nebulous on how we would better incorporate our normal documentation
>processes into the feature request process.
>
>Now that we are starting Mitaka, I¹ve already encountered a couple of
>features where I felt that we needed a better review tool (e.g. gerrit)
>than launchpad. So, I¹ve made an attempt [1] at documenting how we can
>still follow our original intents that I mention above. I also have a
>dependent feature review that follows this process as an example [2].
>
>Please take a look at the workflow proposal review and provide comments.
>We also will discuss this in our weekly meeting. I recommend starting
>with this file: doc/source/feature-requests-bugs.rst
>
>[1] Workflow Proposal - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/243881/
>[2] Zero Downtime Feature - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/243386/
>
>
>Steve,
>
>Regarding you email [3] below.  I feel that the associated blueprint is
>an example of a blueprint that could benefit from a similar Gerrit review
>as described above. What do you think?
>
>[3] Admin indexing -
>http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.cloud.openstack.devel/68685
>
>Thanks,
>Travis
>__________________________________________________________________________
>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev




More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list