Open Stack

Russell Bryant wrote:
> I think perhaps some middle ground makes sense.
> 
> 1) Start doing a better job of generating a priority list, and
> identifying the highest priority items based on group will.
> 
> 2) Expect that reviewers use the priority list to influence their
> general review time.

2b) Discuss those reviews at the weekly team meeting to give them extra
exposure

> 3) Don't actually block other things, should small groups self-organize
> and decide it's important enough to them, even if not to the group as a
> whole.
> 
> That sort of approach still sounds like an improvement to what we have
> today, which is alack of good priority communication to direct general
> review time.

+1

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)