Open Stack

+2 for this

This at least would let me and others know what could be/ will be released in a easy to view fashion. It was nice for grizzly but it seemed to get filled in pretty late (instead of being continuously filled in).

Sent from my really tiny device...

On Apr 12, 2013, at 1:18 AM, "Daviey Walker" <dave.walker at canonical.com> wrote:

> On 12 April 2013 01:47, Joshua Harlow <harlowja at yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>> Ok good to know, I was thinking that the 'state of the project' talk would
>> have a big goal that said PTL can say I will try to do this for these 6
>> months.
>> 
>> Like a presidential campaign :-P
>> 
>> Blueprints are nice and all, but they are to 'low-level' imho, in that
>> they are scattered and don't show a unified single 'goal'.
>> 
>> I could image a 'top-level' goal being.
>> 
>> *Fix nova's use of scheduling*
>> 
>> Then all changes done for that 6 months would try to work towards this
>> goal (+- a few other ones that get in).
>> 
>> On 4/11/13 5:39 PM, "Russell Bryant" <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 04/11/2013 07:00 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote:
>>>> Howdy all,
>>>> 
>>>> I was talking with a co-worker here @ y! and both of us were thinking
>>>> about how we know what features are planned for the next 6 months.
>>>> 
>>>> I know summits are supposed to be the driver of this, and the talks that
>>>> occur, but after the summit sessions and talks and such is there a
>>>> single place/wiki(?) that each PTL states exactly what they plan to
>>>> accomplish after the input from the summit. I see there
>>>> is http://www.openstack.org/software/roadmap/ which is at a very high
>>>> level.
>>>> 
>>>> Would others feel it is useful to have PTL's write down there goals and
>>>> desires for the next 6 months (not at such a high level as the above
>>>> link).
>>>> This can then be referred to when voting for the next PTL and so forth.
>>>> 
>>>> I just have always sort of felt that it was hard to tell what a PTL's
>>>> goals were for each 6 month interval, and how to compare what they
>>>> did/accomplished vs what they stated they would attempt to do.
>>>> Having a plan that the PTL supports seems to be a good thing in general,
>>>> so that the direction of said project is steered.
>>>> 
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>> Does something like this already exist and I didn't find it?
>>> 
>>> Each project will be having a "state of the project" talk on the last
>>> day of the Summit where some of this will be discussed.  Much of the
>>> Havana plan will be captured in blueprints in the time immediately
>>> following the summit.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Russell Bryant
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> Hey,
> 
> I think what would be of most use is draft release notes written with
> the expectations of the release.  Trawling blueprints, as identified
> is really less that ideal - when you want to point someone to a
> summary of the exciting changes.
> 
> The release notes this last cycle, were - erm - less than ideal.. Up
> until the final stretch... Is that something we could be doing better?
> 
> --
> Kind Regards,
> 
> Dave Walker <Dave.Walker at canonical.com>
> Engineering Manager,
> Ubuntu Server
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev