[openstack-dev] [Nova][Keystone] The unbearable lightness of specs

Daniel P. Berrange berrange at redhat.com
Wed Jun 24 16:25:26 UTC 2015

On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 11:52:37AM -0400, Adam Young wrote:
> On 06/24/2015 06:28 AM, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
> >Gerrit and our spec template are a horrible tool for
> >discussing design.
> This is the heart of the problem.
> I think that a proper RFE description in the bug tracker is the best place
> to start.  Not a design of the solution, but a statement of the problem.
> Then, the rest of the discussion should take place in the code. Keystoen has
> the Docs right in the code, as do, I think, every other project.  Don't sign
> off on a patch for a major feature unless the docs have been updated to
> explain that feature.  It will keep us from bike shedding about Database
> schemas.

What you are describing is sounds like the situation that existed before
the specs concept was introduced. We had a statement of problem in the
blueprint, and then people argued over the design in the code reviews.
It really didn't work at all - code reviews are too late in the workflow
to start discussions around the design, as people are already invested
in dev work at that point and get very upset when you then tell them
to throw away their work. Which happened repeatedly. You could say that
the first patch submitted to the code repository should simply be a doc
file addition, that describes the feature proposal and we should discuss
that before then submitting code patches, but then that's essentially
just the specs again, but with the spec doc in the main nova.git instead
of nova-specs.git.

|: http://berrange.com      -o-    http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org              -o-             http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org       -o-         http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-       http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list