Open Stack

On 20 July 2015 at 08:27, Matt Keenan <matt.keenan at oracle.com> wrote:

> On 07/06/15 23:19, Ruby Loo wrote:
>
>> On 1 July 2015 at 08:25, Matt Keenan <matt.keenan at oracle.com
>> <mailto:matt.keenan at oracle.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     In submitting my first ironic spec, I am following the process
>>     outlined at:
>>     https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Ironic/Specs_Process
>>
>>     As of Kilo this suggests we also follow:
>>
>>
>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-August/041960.html
>>
>>     This indicates that once a spec is registered before submission of
>>     the spec text the registered spec needs to be given the ok.
>>
>>     Quick discussion on IRC indicates that this was never adhered to. If
>>     it's not going to be adhered to then I'd suggest removing this
>>     reference from Specs_Process.
>>
>>     cheers
>>
>>     Matt
>>
>>
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> My interpretation of the email you referenced, was to help 'fast-track'
>> two things: 1. new 'features' that didn't require a spec to be written
>> and 2. new 'features' that are out of scope or something that just won't
>> work for whatever reason.
>>
>> I believe it may be true (although I haven't read all the proposed
>> specs) that no one has actually followed that process, but I don't know
>> if that means we should not provide that as a choice. Are you
>> interpreting it as 'You must follow this process' as opposed to 'You
>> could choose to follow this process'?
>>
>
> My interpretation was "You must follow this process", but if it's optional
> then not an issue I guess.
>
> cheers
>
> Matt


Thanks for the feedback Matt. I've updated the wiki so that it is clearer
(I hope) that it is optional!

--ruby
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150722/92a9554f/attachment.html>