Open Stack

Actually, thinking on this more -- the lack of consensus is on the
attempt to re-add the patch, so I guess we'd handle that just like we
do for a contentious patch now.

Michael

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
> This looks reasonable to me, with a slight concern that I don't know
> what step five looks like... What if we can never reach a consensus on
> an issue?
>
> Michael
>
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hey
>>
>> (Terrible name for a policy, I know)
>>
>> From the version_cap saga here:
>>
>>   https://review.openstack.org/110754
>>
>> I think we need a better understanding of how to approach situations
>> like this.
>>
>> Here's my attempt at documenting what I think we're expecting the
>> procedure to be:
>>
>>   https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/nova-retrospective-veto-revert-policy
>>
>> If it sounds reasonably sane, I can propose its addition to the
>> "Development policies" doc.
>>
>> Mark.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
>
> --
> Rackspace Australia



-- 
Rackspace Australia