[nova] "future" specs and blueprints

Kashyap Chamarthy kchamart at redhat.com
Tue Apr 2 10:56:51 UTC 2019

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 04:10:09PM -0500, Eric Fried wrote:

(Just catching up with this thread, post-PTO.)


> New proposal: How do folks feel about using the `backlog` directory
> again? Presumably starting with scrubbing the four specs that are in it.


I get a nagging feeling at the back of my head whenever I see specs in
the "approved" directory for a given release, but they are not
completed, or needs to be re-proposed for any number of good reasons.

So yes, having this `specs/backlog/approved` does have a benefit (even
if it is 'marginal') than "leaving things as unmerged in Gerrit", where
every spec is a bland Gerrit URL, and their HTML renderings will have
gotten purged.

I agree with you that it gives a "crisper picture" of reality by not
muddying the waters of what is actually completed.  Plus it gives us a
clean, rendered overview of what ideas we thought were worth pursuing
(which, as Gibi noted, will be re-evaluated at the time of transition
from "backlog" to "approved").  And, as you stated in the "Backlog
specifications" section[2] in the README, it can act as a robust
starting point for those (especially for experienced developers) who
want to get involved with Nova.

        * * *

On the topic of merging 'nova-specs' into 'nova' repo, Jeremy raised
some really good points in his repsonse[2].  Unless I see his points
addressed with compelling answers, I'd vote for keeping the 'nova-specs'
repo separate.  (I should admit that I don't know what was the original
impetus for merging it into the 'nova' repo.)

[1] http://logs.openstack.org/00/648800/3/check/openstack-tox-docs/e601952/html/readme.html#backlog-specifications
[2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/004314.html



More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list