[openstack-dev] [glance] The sorry state of our spec process
flavio at redhat.com
Thu Jul 9 18:30:37 UTC 2015
Ok, I guess I'll bite my own thread and provide some feedback:
We hold a glance-drivers meeting every week on Tuesdays at 14 UTC. In
this week's meetingi, we discussed a bit the problems we have in the
current workflow. Here's some feedback from that meeting. (Please,
other folks, do chime in and provide the information that I likely
On 01/07/15 15:49 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>We're 1 week through L-2 (or is it 2?, I can't do time) and we, the
>glance project, haven't even merged a single spec. Regardless of the
>reasons behind this situation and the fact that we've been indeed
>taking steps to improve this situation, I think we should put this
>issue to an end.
>There are many issues we've faced in Glance:
>1. The glance-drivers team is too small 
>2. Many specs have been held back waiting for code 
>3. Huge expectations from the spec and very low review rate (even from
>other members of the glance team).
>There was a recent discussion on this m-l about the spec process in
>Nova and while I don't agree with everything that was said there, I do
>think it highlights important problems that we're facing in glance as
>Therefore, I'd like to propose the following:
>1. Expand our drivers team. I thik people in the glance community are
>getting annoyed of reading this requests from me and "The Mythical
>Man-Month" would agree with them. However, it's really sad that some
>of our oldest (in terms of tenure) contributors that have shown
>interest in joining the team haven't been added yet. I proposed to
>bring all cores to the drivers team already and I still think that's a
>good thing. Assuming that's something we don't want, then I'd like us
>to find 2 or 3 people willing to volunteer for this task.
We touched this topic but we didn't dive into it. It was agreed to add
at least one person to the team and remove people that are not
contributors anymore. I'll send an email later about this.
>2. Lets try to get things into the backlog instead of expecting them
>to be perfectly shaped and targeted for this release. Lets let people
>start from a base, generally agreed, idea so that code can be written
>and reviews on the actual feature can be made. Once the feature is
>implemented, we can move the spec to the release directory. I believe
>this was also proposed in Nikola's thread.
We agreed on moving things to the backlog and see how it'll work.
Instead of worrying about milestones on the spec itself, we can worry
about the feature and prioritize as soon as the code is proposed.
This doesn't mean the project has no priorities. If anything, I
believe one of the benefits of this is to allow the already small team
to focus on what's important.
>3. Not all specs need to have 3-month-long discussions to be approved.
>I'm not suggesting to just merge specs that are in poor state but we
>can't always ask for code to understand whether a spec makes sense or
There's some disagreement on how we should tackle this point. I
believe the agreement is to also try not to seek perfection in the
spec itself but to allow for updating specs when "unexpected" things
come up during the implementation.
The points we all look forward to have detailed and clear in the spec
are already part of the spec template.
I hope this discussion will help the glance community to provide
better response time, feedback and to help the project move forward,
even in liberty.
P.S: The above is partly a short-term plan to help moving things
forward in Liberty. There are other things that I believe we should
integrate into Glance's development workflow but those should be part
of the next development cycle.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the OpenStack-dev