Open Stack

On 10/14/14, 10:22 AM, "Everett Toews" <everett.toews at RACKSPACE.COM> wrote:

>On Oct 14, 2014, at 8:57 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I personally think proposing patches to an openstack-api repository is
>>the most effective way to make those proposals. Etherpads and wiki pages
>>are fine for dumping content, but IMO, we don't need to dump content --
>>we already have plenty of it. We need to propose guidelines for *new*
>>APIs to follow.
>
>+1
>
>I’m all for putting a stake in the ground (in the form of docs in a repo)
>and having people debate that. I think it results in a much more focused
>discussion as opposed to dumping content into an etherpad/wiki page and
>trying to wade through it. If people want to dump content somewhere and
>use that to help inform their contributions to the repo, that’s okay too.
>
>Another big benefit of putting things in a repo is provenance. Guidelines
>like these can be...contentious...at times. Having a clear history of how
>a guideline got into a repo is very valuable as you can link newcomers
>who challenge a guideline to the history of how it got there, who
>approved it, and the tradeoffs that were considered during the review
>process. Of course, this is possible with etherpad/wiki too but it’s more
>difficult to reconstruct the history.
>
>Everett

Also, I don’t think the first version of the standards are going to get
everything right so setting something as the starting point seems the most
reasonable. Waiting entire cycles to include a new piece of the standard
seems  a bit impractical.