Open Stack

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 8:17 PM, Chen, Wei D <wei.d.chen at intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Stefano,
>
> Thanks so much for your detailed answer, I finally know the reason why
> those patches are not reviewed in this cycle.
> Actually, this BP (
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/python-cinderclient/+spec/support-modify-volume-image-metadata)
> is created very
> early around Nov. 2014, and there is BP even earlier before that
> (
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/python-cinderclient/+spec/support-volume-image-metadata)
> which is created around May 2014.
>
> Maybe they just believe this is not such important and not worth to take
> time to review. Hope those patches could be reviewed in
> 'L'.
>
> Best Regards,
> Dave Chen
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:stefano at openstack.org]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 10:14 PM
> > To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [cinder]difference between spec merged and
> BP approval
> >
> > Hi David,
> >
> > 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[1] is
> > > merged, but it seems I am wrong from the beginning[2], both of them
> > > (SPEC merged and BP approval[4][5]) 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:
> >
> > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints#Spec_.2B_Blueprints_lifecycle
> >
> > 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,
> > https://launchpad.net/cinder/+milestone/kilo-3
> >
> > I've tried to piece the history of your experience from the links you
> > provided:
> >
> > - you submitted the spec in November 2014
> > - the spec was approved on Jan 6, 2015 (from
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/136253/)
> > - 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 today
> >
> > 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[3],
> > > 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 core teams.
> >
> > Have you considered joining OpenStack Upstream Training?
> >
> https://www.openstack.org/blog/2015/02/openstack-upstream-training-in-vancouver/
> >
> > Cheers,
> > stef
> >
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
> ​First I'd like to thank Stef for the clear explanation; second I'd like
to apologize Dave if you're feeling like nobody cares or don't feel your
patch is that important.  That's really not the case, it's just a matter of
scheduling and priorities and honestly sometimes there's just more in the
pipeline than we're able to actually process.

I did notice that the bulk of your bp did in fact merge so that's good.
Things like the cinderclient are a special case and don't have the same
deadlines or prioritization. I'll take a look at what you have submitted
again tomorrow, in the meantime you might want to jump on IRC at
#openstack-cinder and look up myself or even better thingee who is the PTL
for the Cinder project.  There's plenty of core folks who should be willing
and able to talk through some of the process stuff with you and discuss
your patch.

Also keep in mind that we have a weekly meeting on IRC that​ is intended to
provide a forum for topics exactly like this and help us from letting
things slip through the cracks.

Thanks,
John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150311/56a72a32/attachment.html>