Open Stack

> From: Gary Kotton [mailto:gkotton at vmware.com]> 
> 
> On 7/30/14, 8:22 PM, "Kevin L. Mitchell" <kevin.mitchell at rackspace.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, 2014-07-30 at 09:01 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
> >> As a stable-maint, I'm always hesitant to review patches I've no
> >> understanding on, hence I end up just checking how big is the patch,
> >> whether it adds/removes new configuration options etc but, the real
> >> review has to be done by someone with good understanding of the
> change.
> >>
> >> Something I've done in the past is adding the folks that had
> approved
> >> the patch on master to the stable/maint review. They should know
> that
> >> code already, which means it shouldn't take them long to review it.
> All
> >> the sanity checks should've been done already.
> >>
> >> With all that said, I'd be happy to give *-core approval permissions
> on
> >> stable branches, but I still think we need a dedicated team that has
> a
> >> final (or at least relevant) word on the patches.
> >
> >Maybe what we need to do is give *-core permission to +2 the patches,
> >but only stable/maint team has *approval* permission.  Then, the cores
> >can review the code, and stable/maint only has to verify applicability
> >to the stable branchŠ
> 
> +1
>

+1

This approach guarantees final say by the stable/maint team, but lets any core validate that the patch is appropriate from the project's technical perspective.  It keeps the balance but broadens the validation pool.

--Rocky 

> >--
> >Kevin L. Mitchell <kevin.mitchell at rackspace.com>
> >Rackspace
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >OpenStack-dev mailing list
> >OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev