Open Stack

I'm going to start out by making this clear: I am not looking to incite 
a flame war.

I've been working in Magnum for a couple of weeks now, and I'm starting 
to get down the processes for contribution. I'm here to talk about the 
process of always needing to have a patch associated with a bug or 
blueprint.

I have a good example of this being too strict. I knew the rules, so I 
opened [1] to say there are some improperly named variables and classes. 
I think it took longer for me to open the bug than it did to actually 
fix it. I think we need to start taking a look at how strict we need to 
be in requiring bugs to be opened and linked to patches. I understand 
it's a fine line between "it's broken" to "it would be nice to make this 
better".

I remember the debate when I was originally putting up [2] for review. 
The worry was that if these new tests would cut into developer 
productivity because it is more strict. The same argument can be applied 
to opening these bugs. If we have to open something up for everything we 
want to upload a patch for, that's just another step in the process to 
take up time.

Now, with my opinion out there, if we still want to take the direction 
of opening up bugs for everything, I will comply (I'm not the guy making 
decisions around here). I would like to see clear and present 
documentation explaining this to new contributors, though ([3] would 
probably be a good place to explain this).

Once again, not looking to start an argument. If everyone feels the way 
it works now is the best, I'm more than happy to join in :)

[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1496568
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/217342/
[3] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/magnum/contributing.html

-- 
Thanks,

Ryan Rossiter (rlrossit)