[openstack-dev] [cinder]difference between spec merged and BP approval
stefano at openstack.org
Tue Mar 10 14:14:26 UTC 2015
On Sat, 2015-03-07 at 02:22 +0000, Chen, Wei D wrote:
> I thought the feature should be approved as long as the SPEC is
> merged, but it seems I am wrong from the beginning, both of
> them (SPEC merged and BP approval) is necessary and mandatory
> for getting some effective reviews, right? anyone can help to
> confirm with that?
Since Cinder uses BP+spec, the process is described on the wiki page:
If it helps, I'd consider the spec and the blueprint as "one" element
made of two pieces. The spec needs to be "approved" and its
corresponding blueprint needs to be approved and have a priority,
deadline/milestone assigned. If any of these attributes is missing, the
feature is not going to be reviewed.
Blueprints and their attributes 'priority' and 'milestone' are used to
track the status of the release. The reviewers use BPs to identify the
code that they need to review. For example,
I've tried to piece the history of your experience from the links you
- you submitted the spec in November 2014
- the spec was approved on Jan 6, 2015 (from
- the spec references two blueprints, one for Cinder, one of
Cinder-client; both BPs were created at the end of February
- none of the BP have a milestone set
- you submitted code related to the approved spec between Jan 6 and
I have the impression that you may have missed a step in the BP+spec
process. I have tried to find the documentation for this process myself
and I had a hard time, too.
> Besides, who is eligible to define/modify the priority in the list,
> only PTL or any core? I am trying to understand the
> acceptable procedure for the coming 'L'.
The project team leaders (PTL) are ultimately responsible to set the
priorities, although the decision is always a consensual decision of the
Have you considered joining OpenStack Upstream Training?
More information about the OpenStack-dev