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.
Hi,
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. well the html rendering are not really useful for reviewign a spec you might want to look at the near the end when the content is correct so that
On Tue, 2019-04-02 at 12:56 +0200, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: the archive form looks nice but i would expects most peopel to read the rst directly.
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 tought i had fully adressed all of jeremy's questions in http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/004317.htm... i abandonded that direction simply because peopel seamed to feel the git subtree magic need to create a muli root git tree to extract
well actully completed specs get copied into the implemented directory. i dont think we tend to get a lot of future reaching specs. we get some that can not be completed due to developer or review bandwith in a singel cycle or that end up haveing depencies that mean the get punted to a follow up release. i have found most feature related to numa/nfv often take 2-3 cycles to fully land but that is generally not by intent. the spec directory form nova-specs and add it to nova was more hassel then it was worth. if i missed one of jeremy's point please respond but i didnt see any of the as a blocker for this work but perserving the history is something im willing to conceed is slightly more effort then i would like given the rewards.
(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/... [2] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/004314.htm...
[...]