Open Stack

On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 10:38:38 -0500, Matt Riedemann wrote:
> On 3/20/2018 6:44 PM, melanie witt wrote:
>> We were thinking of starting the runways process after the spec review
>> freeze (which is April 19) so that reviewers won't be split between spec
>> reviews and reviews of work in runways.
> 
> I'm going to try and reign in the other thread [1] and bring it back here.
> 
> The request to discuss this in the nova meeting was discussed, log
> starts here [2].
> 
> For me personally, I'm OK with starting runways now, before the spec
> freeze, if we also agree to move the spec freeze out past milestone 1,
> so either milestone 2 or feature freeze (~milestone 3).
> 
> This is because we have far fewer people that actually review specs, and
> I personally don't want to have the expectation/pressure to be
> reviewing, at a high level anyway, both specs before the deadline along
> with runways at the same time.
> 
> Moving out the spec freeze also means that assuming runways works and
> we're good about flushing things through the queue, we can seed more
> blueprints based on specs we approve later.
> 
> Given we already have 33 approved but not yet completed blueprints, we
> have plenty of content to keep us busy with runways for the next couple
> of months.
> 
> If we start runways now and don't move out the spec freeze, I'm OK with
> that but I personally will probably be devoting more of my time to
> reviewing specs than stuff in the runways.

I kind of like the idea of moving spec freeze out to near milestone 3, 
that is, for the most part not have a freeze, and start runways now.

My thinking is, as was mentioned in the other thread, we've already 
approved ~75% of the number of blueprints we approved last cycle and 
last cycle we had a 79% completion percentage of approved blueprints. 
I'd be inclined to mostly stop approving new things now until we've 
completed some via runways.

I think the only concern around moving spec freeze out would be that I 
thought the original purpose of the spec freeze was to set expectations 
early about what was approved and not approved instead of having folks 
potentially in the situation where it's technically "maybe" for a large 
chunk of the cycle. I'm not sure which most people prefer -- would you 
rather know early and definitively whether your blueprint is 
approved/not approved or would you rather have the opportunity to get 
approval during a larger window in the cycle and not know definitively 
early on? Can anyone else chime in here?

-melanie