Open Stack

I'd like to suggest two things.

Firstly a section on scale (as opposed to performance).

Secondly, I'd like to see additional hard requirements that will be
added to drivers called out (e.g. a 'Driver Impact' section).

-Rob

On 19 May 2014 10:03, Devananda van der Veen <devananda.vdv at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As with several other projects, and as discussed at the summit, Ironic is
> moving to a formal / specs-based design process. The reasons for this have
> been well summarized in previous email threads in other projects [*], but in
> short, it's because, until now, nearly all our blueprints lacked a design
> specification which could be compared to the proposed code, resulting in the
> code-review also being a design-review. This week, I will be resetting the
> "Definition" status of all blueprints to "New", and require everything to go
> through a specs review process -- yes, even the ones that were previously
> approved.
>
> I've proposed the creation of the openstack/ironic-specs repo here:
>   https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94113/
>
> And put up an initial version on github to start the process:
>   https://github.com/devananda/ironic-specs
>   https://github.com/devananda/ironic-specs/blob/master/specs/template.rst
>
> I've begun sketching out specs proposals for some of the essential-for-juno
> items, which can be found in the above repo for now, and will be proposed
> for review once the openstack/ironic-specs repository is created.
>
> For what it's worth, I based this on the Nova specs repo, with some
> customization geared towards Ironic (eg, I removed "notifications" section
> and added some comments regarding hardware). At this point, I'd like
> feedback from other core reviewers and folks familiar with the specs
> process. Please think about the types of architectural changes you look for
> during code reviews and make sure the specs template addresses them, and
> that they apply to Ironic.
>
> I will focus on creating and landing the specs for items essential for
> graduation first and then prioritize review of additional feature specs
> based on the community feedback we received at the Juno Design Summit. I
> will send another email soliciting the community members and vendors to
> propose specs for the features they are working on once the initial work on
> the repo is complete (hopefully before end-of-week).
>
> Regards,
> Devananda
>
>
> [*] eg.:
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-April/032753.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



-- 
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud