[openstack-dev] [TripleO][Nova] Specs and approvals

Jay Pipes jaypipes at gmail.com
Tue Aug 19 15:28:59 UTC 2014

On 08/19/2014 11:23 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 08/19/2014 05:31 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
>> Hey everybody - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TripleO/SpecReviews
>> seems pretty sane as we discussed at the last TripleO IRC meeting.
>> I'd like to propose that we adopt it with the following tweak:
>> 19:46:34 <lifeless> so I propose that +2 on a spec is a commitment to
>> review it over-and-above the core review responsibilities
>> 19:47:05 <lifeless> if its not important enough for a reviewer to do
>> that thats a pretty strong signal
>> 19:47:06 <dprince> lifeless: +1, I thought we already agreed to that
>> at the meetup
>> 19:47:17 <slagle> yea, sounds fine to me
>> 19:47:20 <bnemec> +1
>> 19:47:30 <lifeless> dprince: it wasn't clear whether it was
>> part-of-responsibility, or additive, I'm proposing we make it clearly
>> additive
>> 19:47:52 <lifeless> and separately I think we need to make surfacing
>> reviews-for-themes a lot better
>> That is - +1 on a spec review is 'sure, I like it', +2 is specifically
>> "I will review this *over and above* my core commitment" - the goal
>> here is to have some very gentle choke on concurrent WIP without
>> needing the transition to a managed pull workflow that Nova are
>> discussing - which we didn't have much support for during the meeting.
>> Obviously, any core can -2 for any of the usual reasons - this motion
>> is about opening up +A to the whole Tripleo core team on specs.
>> Reviewers, and other interested kibbitzers, please +1 / -1 as you feel fit :)
> +1
> I really like this.  In fact, I like it a lot more than the current
> proposal for Nova.  I think the Nova team should consider this, as well.
> It still rate limits code reviews by making core reviewers explicitly
> commit to reviewing things.  This is like our previous attempt at
> sponsoring blueprints, but the use of gerrit I think would make it more
> successful.
> It also addresses my primary concerns with the tensions between "group
> will" and small groups no longer being able to self organize and push
> things to completion without having to haggle through yet another process.


Me likee.

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list