Open Stack

On 05/14/15 21:04, Boris Pavlovic wrote:
> John,
>
> I believe that backlog should be different much simpler then specs.
>
> Imho Operators don't have time / don't want to write long long specs 
> and analyze how they are aligned with specs
> or moreover how they should be implemented and how they impact 
> performance/security/scalability. They want
> just to provide feedback and someday get it implemented/fixed.
>
> In Rally we chose different way called "feature request".
> The process is the same as for specs, but template is much simpler.
Bravo!!!!

Can we please have this as a default template and the default way to 
allow Operators to submit a feature request for EVERY and ALL the 
OpenStack projects ??


>
> Here is the page:
> https://rally.readthedocs.org/en/latest/feature_requests.html
>
> And here is the sample of feature request:
> https://rally.readthedocs.org/en/latest/feature_request/launch_specific_benchmark.html
>
>
> Best regards,
> Boris Pavlovic
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Boris Pavlovic 
> <bpavlovic at mirantis.com <mailto:bpavlovic at mirantis.com>> wrote:
>
>     John,
>
>     I believe that backlog should be different much simpler then specs.
>
>     Imho Operators don't have time / don't want to write long long
>     specs and analyze how they are aligned with specs
>     or moreover how they should be implemented and how they impact
>     performance/security/scalability. They want
>     just to provide feedback and someday get it implemented/fixed.
>
>     In Rally we chose different way called "feature request".
>     The process is the same as for specs, but template is much simpler.
>
>     Here is the page:
>     https://rally.readthedocs.org/en/latest/feature_requests.html
>
>     And here is the sample of feature request:
>     https://rally.readthedocs.org/en/latest/feature_request/launch_specific_benchmark.html
>
>
>     Best regards,
>     Boris Pavlovic
>
>     On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 8:47 PM, John Garbutt
>     <john at johngarbutt.com <mailto:john at johngarbutt.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hi,
>
>         I was talking with Matt (VW) about how best some large deployment
>         working sessions could send their requirements to Nova.
>
>         As an operator, if you have a problem that needs fixing or use
>         case
>         that needs addressing, a great way of raising that issue with the
>         developer community is a "Backlog" nova-spec.
>
>         You can read more about Nova's backlog specs here:
>         http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/backlog/
>
>         Any questions, comments or ideas, please do let me know.
>
>         Thanks,
>         John
>
>         PS
>         In Kilo we formally started accepting "backlog specs",
>         although we are
>         only just getting the first of these submitted now. There is
>         actually
>         a patch to fix up how they get rendered:
>         https://review.openstack.org/#/c/182793/2
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         OpenStack-operators mailing list
>         OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
>         <mailto:OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org>
>         http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators

-- 
Best Regards,
Maish Saidel-Keesing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20150514/7eaba070/attachment.html>