Open Stack

On 07/13/2014 04:01 PM, Dolph Mathews wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Jay Bryant
> <jsbryant at electronicjungle.net <mailto:jsbryant at electronicjungle.net>>
> wrote:
> 
>     I had been under the impression that all BPs we going to require a
>     spec.  I, however,  was made are in today's cinder meeting that we
>     are only requiring specs for changes that change the user's
>     interaction with the system or are a large change that touches the
>     broader cinder code base.
> 
> That's generally where we use blueprints in Keystone, anyway. If the
> change has no impact on end users, deployers or other projects, then it
> doesn't need a spec/blueprint. For example, a refactor only affects
> developers of Keystone, so I'd argue that blueprints are unnecessary.
> 
> The premise of a "large change that touches the broader ... code base"
> requiring a blueprint is flawed though - we don't want to review large
> changes anyway ;)
> 

I almost fully agree with this last point. The bit I don't agree with is
that there are some small refactor changes that aim to change a core
piece of the project without any impact on the final user that are
spec/blueprint worthy to explaining the motivation, expected results and
drawbacks.

To put it in another way. Developers are consumers of project's code,
therefore the changes affecting the way developers interact with the
code are also blueprint worth it, IMHO.

Flavio

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco