Open Stack

Erno,


> My personal take is that if some piece of work has not been touched for a
> month, it’s probably not that important after all and the community should
> use the resources to do some work that has actual momentum.


Based on my experience, one of the most common situation in OpenStack is
next:
1) Somebody makes fast (but with right idea) changes, because he (and
usually others) needs it
2) It doesn't pass review process fast
3) Author of this patch has billions others tasks (not related to upstream)
and
can't work on this change anymore
4) Patch get's abounded and forgotten

The changes itself will not disappear the owner is still able to revive it
> if felt that there is right time to continue it.


Nobody never reviews abounded changes..

 The cleanup will just make it easier for people to focus on things that
> are actually moving.


Making decision based on activity around patches is not the best way to do
things.

If we take a look at the structure of OpenStack projects we will see next
things:

1) Things that re moving fast/good are usually related to things that core
team (or active members) are working on.
This team is resolving limited set of use cases (this is mostly related
because not every member is running it's own production cloud)

2) Operators/Admins/DevOps that are running their own cloud have a lot of
experience knows a lot of missing use cases and
source of issues. But usually they are not involved in community process so
they don't know whole road map of project, so they are not able to fully
align their patches with road map, or eventually just don't have enough
time to work on features.

So abounding patches from 2 group just because of inactivity can make big
harm to project.


 Do you have resources in mind to dedicate for this?


Sometimes I am doing it by my self, sometimes newbies in community (that
want some work to get involved), sometimes core team is working on old
patches.


Important chagesets are supposed to have bugs (or blueprints) assigned
> to them, so, even if the CS is abandoned, its description still
> remains on Launchpad in one form or another, so we will not loose it
> from general project's backlog


This is not true in a lot of cases. =)
 In many cases DevOps/Operators don't know or don't want to spend time for
launchpad/specs/ and so on.



Best regards,
Boris Pavlovic


On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:17 PM, Kuvaja, Erno <kuvaja at hp.com> wrote:

>  Hi Boris,
>
>
>
> Thanks for your input. I do like the idea of picking up the changes that
> have not been active. Do you have resources in mind to dedicate for this?
>
>
>
> My personal take is that if some piece of work has not been touched for a
> month, it’s probably not that important after all and the community should
> use the resources to do some work that has actual momentum. The changes
> itself will not disappear the owner is still able to revive it if felt that
> there is right time to continue it. The cleanup will just make it easier
> for people to focus on things that are actually moving. It also will make
> bug tracking bit easier when one will see on the bug report that the patch
> got abandoned due to inactivity and indicates that the owner of that bug
> might not be working on it after all.
>
>
>
> -          Erno
>
>
>
> *From:* Boris Pavlovic [mailto:bpavlovic at mirantis.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 13, 2015 1:25 PM
> *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [glance] Cleanout of inactive change
> proposals from review
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> I believe that keeping review queue clean is the great idea.
>
> But I am not sure that set of these rules is enough to abandon patches.
>
>
>
> Recently I wrote blogpost related to making OpenStack community more user
> friendly:
>
>
> http://boris-42.me/thoughts-on-making-openstack-community-more-user-friendly/
>
>
>
> tl;dr;
>
>
>
> Patches on review are great source of information what is missing in
> project.
>
> Removing them from queue means losing this essential information. The
> result
>
> of such actions is that project doesn't face users requirements which is
> quite bad...
>
>
>
> What if that project team continue work on all "abandoned" patches  that
> are covering
>
> valid use cases and finish them?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Boris Pavlovic
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 13/02/15 11:06 +0000, Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We have almost year old (from last update) reviews still in the queue for
> glance. The discussion was initiated on yesterday’s meeting for adopting
> abandon policy for stale changes.
>
> The documentation can be found from https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/
> glance-cleanout-of-inactive-PS and any input would be appreciated. For your
> convenience current state below:
>
>
> Thanks for putting this together. I missed the meeting yday and this
> is important.
>
> Glance - Cleanout of inactive change proposals from review
>
>
> We Should start cleaning out our review list to keep the focus on changes
> that
> has momentum. Nova is currently abandoning change proposals that has been
> inactive for 4 weeks.
>
>
>
> Proposed action (if all of the following is True, abandon the PS):
>
> 1. The PS has -1/-2 (including Jenkins)
>
>
> I assume you're talking about voting -1/-2 and not Workflow, right?
> (you said jenkins afterall but just for the sake of clarity).
>
> 2. The change is proposed to glance, glance_store or python-glanceclient;
>    specs should not be abandoned as their workflow is much slower
>
> 3. No activity for 28 days from Author/Owner after the -1/-2
>
>
> I'd reword this in "No activity". This includes comments, feedback,
> discussions and or other committers taking over a patch.
>
> 4. There has been  query made to the owner to update the patch between 5
> and
>    10 days  before abandoning (comment on PS/Bug or something similar)
>
>  ● Let's be smart on this. Flexibility is good on holiday seasons, during
>    feature freeze, etc.
>
>
> +2 to the above, I like it.
>
> Thanks again,
> Flavio
>
> --
> @flaper87
> Flavio Percoco
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150213/195591c5/attachment.html>