[openstack-dev] How to improve the specs review process (was Re: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward)
richardwoo2003 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 7 00:40:25 UTC 2014
I agreed with Jay. Nova is one of the consumer of Neutron project, someone
from Nova project should participate reviewing related blueprint in neutron
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/06/2014 07:54 PM, Kevin Benton wrote:
>> I'm curious, how would having Nova reviewers look at this have helped?
> As I mentioned on a previous email, Nova is the pre-eminent consumer of
> Neutron's API.
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com
>> <mailto:jaypipes at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> On 08/06/2014 07:08 PM, CARVER, PAUL wrote:
>> On Aug 6, 2014, at 2:01 PM, Mohammad Banikazemi <mb at us.ibm.com
>> <mailto:mb at us.ibm.com><mailto:mb at us.__ibm.com
>> <mailto:mb at us.ibm.com>>>
>> Yes, indeed.
>> I do not want to be over dramatic but the discussion on the
>> original "Group
>> Based Policy and the way forward" thread is nothing short of
>> After months and months of discussions, three presentations
>> at the past three
>> summits, a design session at the last summit, and (most
>> relevant to this
>> thread) the approval of the spec, why are we talking about
>> the merits of the
>> work now?
>> I understand if people think this is not a good idea or this
>> is not a good
>> time. What I do not understand is why these concerns were
>> not raised clearly
>> and openly earlier.
>> I have to agree here. I'm not sure whether my organization needs
>> GBP or not.
>> It's certainly not our top priority for Neutron given a variety
>> of other more
>> important functional gaps. However, I saw their demo at the
>> summit and it was
>> clear that a lot of work had gone into it even before Icehouse.
>> From the demo
>> it was clearly a useful enhancement to Neutron even if it wasn't
>> at the top
>> of my priority list.
>> For people to be asking to justify the "why" this far into the
>> Juno cycle
>> when the spec was approved and the code was demoed at the summit
>> brings the OpenStack process into question. It's one thing to
>> technical merits of contributions but it's totally different to
>> pull the rug
>> out from under a group of contributors at the last minute after
>> such a long
>> period of development, discussion, and demo.
>> Seeing this sort of last minute rejection of a contribution
>> after so much
>> time has been invested in it could very easily have a chilling
>> effect on
>> I don't disagree with you, Paul.
>> I blame myself for not paying the attention I should have to this
>> earlier in the process.
>> FWIW, I had a good conversation with Sumit and Kevin on
>> #openstack-neutron this afternoon about this particular topic. We
>> agree on some things; disagree on others.
>> Bottom line, I go back to what I said in a previous email: the Nova
>> and Neutron development teams need to do a much better job in being
>> directly involved in each other's spec discussions and design
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.__org
>> <mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
>> Kevin Benton
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev