[openstack-dev] [Nova] Proposal to merge blueprints that just missed Icehouse-3 in early Juno-1

John Garbutt john at johngarbutt.com
Thu Mar 6 11:21:00 UTC 2014

On 6 March 2014 10:51, John Garbutt <john at johngarbutt.com> wrote:
> On 5 March 2014 15:02, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:
>> Nova is now feature frozen for the Icehouse release.  Patches for
>> blueprints not already merged will need a feature freeze exception (FFE)
>> to be considered for Icehouse.
>> In addition to evaluation the request in terms of risks and benefits, I
>> would like to require that every FFE be sponsored by two members of
>> nova-core.  This is to ensure that there are reviewers willing to review
>> the code in a timely manner so that we can exclusively focus on bug
>> fixes as soon as possible.
> To help avoid adding too many FFE and not getting enough bug fixing done...
> I have a proposal to try and get many of the blueprints that just
> missed getting into Icehouse merged in early Juno, ideally before the
> Summit.
> For the interested, here are blueprints that met the proposal deadline
> but didn't make Icehouse-3:
> * API (v2) blueprints: 8
> * VMware: 7
> * Scheduler blueprints: 7  (two were partially completed in Icehouse)
> * Others: around another 7
> Making an effort to get these merged in Juno-1, and ideally before the
> summit, seems a fair thing to do.
> Once Juno opens, if submitters get their blueprint patches rebased and
> ready to review by two weeks before the summit, I propose we try to
> give them (where possible, and where it makes sense) at least medium
> priority, at least until after the summit.
> If we get too many takers, that might need some "refinement". However,
> looking at them, they all appear to be features that our users would
> really benefit from.
> This probably means, all non-"top priority" items would then get low
> priority in Juno-1. Currently tasks (at least the move to conductor
> parts), the scheduler split and objects, seem like they will be the
> other high priority items for Juno-1.

My bad, API work is clearly in that top priority list.

> This is all very rough, and subject to massive post-summit change, but
> looking at the ones with their priority set, gives a rough idea of
> what Juno-1 might look like:
> https://launchpad.net/nova/+milestone/next
> Its just an idea. What do you all think?
> John

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list