Open Stack

On 03/24/2014 12:20 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> On 03/24/2014 11:42 AM, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
>> On 03/22/2014 03:14 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>>> Honestly, I largely disagree. This is applying some process where there
>>> clearly wasn't any before.
>>
>> We have a different perception evidently. I'm assuming you're
>> exaggerating for the sake of clarity because assuming there was no
>> process before means that the releases are basically randomly defined.
>>
>>> Storyboard remains vaporware. I will be enormously happy when it is not.
>> [...]
>>
>> That's depressing to read. I'm again assuming you're using exaggerated
>> words to paint a clearer picture.
>>
>> At this point I'd like to get a fair assessment of storyboard's status
>> and timeline: it's clear that Launchpad blueprints need to be abandoned
>> lightspeed fast and I (and others) have been sold the idea that
>> Storyboard is a *thing* that will happen *soon*. I also was told that
>> spec reviews are an integral part of Storyboard use case scenarios, not
>> just defects.
> 
> Another critical point of clarification ... we are *not* moving out of
> blueprints at all.  We're still using them for tracking, just as before.
>  We are *adding* the use of gerrit for reviewing the design.
> 
> Prior to this, we had no tool to assist with doing the actual review of
> the spec.  We used blueprint whiteboards, the mailing list, and
> discussions in various other places.  We're *adding* the use of gerrit
> as a centralized and organized place to do design reviews.

... and random etherpads (which may or may not have gotten vandalized
over time), and random wiki pages, and random google docs (which may or
may not have been visible to everyone), and private email discussions.

> We will continue to use blueprints for tracking what we plan to go into
> each release, as well as it's current status.

Agreed. This isn't a tracking tool, this is handling a piece of the
process which has been a train wreck for so long, and that we had no
tool support.

Blueprints today support the idea of a detailed specification at a URL.
This is taking all those divergent URLs and making them all point to one
place, a gerrit repo, where the entire history of the discussion will be
publicly viewable and auditable.

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
Samsung Research America
sean at dague.net / sean.dague at samsung.com
http://dague.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140324/4ddedb1d/attachment.pgp>