<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:52 AM, Christopher Yeoh <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cbkyeoh@gmail.com" target="_blank">cbkyeoh@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="">On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Sylvain Bauza <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sbauza@redhat.com" target="_blank">sbauza@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div>Le 15/10/2014 11:56, Christopher Yeoh a
écrit :<br>
</div><div><div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Alex
Xu <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:xuhj@linux.vnet.ibm.com" target="_blank">xuhj@linux.vnet.ibm.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>On 2014年10月15日 14:20, Christopher Yeoh
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi,<br>
<br>
I was wondering what people thought of having a
convention of adding<br>
an APIImpact flag to proposed nova specs commit
messages where the<br>
Nova API will change? It would make it much easier
to find proposed<br>
specs which affect the API as its not always clear
from the gerrit<br>
summary listing.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
+1, and is there any tool can be used by search flag?<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Can use the message: filter in the gerrit web search
interface to search in commit messages, or</div>
<div>alternatively use gerritlib to write something custom.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div></div>
IMHO, asking people to put a tag on a commit msg is good but
errorprone because there could be some misses.<br>
Considering that API changes require new templates, why not asking
for people to provide on a separate tpl file the changes they want
to provide, and make use of the Gerrit file pattern search like<br>
specs/kilo/approved/*.tpl ?<br>
<br>
<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>We don't require new templates as part of nova-specs and api changes don't necessarily change the api sample tpl files. We do ask for some jsonschema descriptions of the new APIs input but they work pretty well in the spec document itself. I agree it could be prone to spelling mistakes etc, though just being able to search for 'api' would be sufficient and people who review specs could pick up missing or mispelled flags in the commit message (and it wouldn't necessarily need to be restricted to just APIImpact as possible flags). </div><div><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I think adding APIImpact will be useful. </div><div><br></div><div>I also want to point to the addition of Compute v2 (haven't yet proposed a spec for v2.1) to the nova-specs repo here:</div><div><br></div><div><a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/129329/">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/129329/</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>The goal is to move information from the compute-api repo into the -specs repo. I sent an email to the PTLs in August and then added it in the What's Up Doc Oct 7th so hopefully this doesn't take anyone by surprise. You'll notice if you review that I don't have the template test in place that exist for the other blueprint templates, rather the ideal is that a new file would be added into api/v2.1 if a blueprint affects the API design that describes the correct response/request, error codes, and other relevant info. Also if the feature affects faults, limits, links, pagination, and so on, the spec review would address that in the api spec.</div><div><br></div><div>Let me know your thoughts on the review. </div><div>Thanks,</div><div>Anne</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>Chris</div></div></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>