Open Stack

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 08:01:31PM -0700, Jason Rist wrote:
> On 01/27/2016 09:21 AM, Derek Higgins wrote:
> > Hi All,
> > 
> > We briefly discussed feature tracking in this weeks tripleo meeting. I
> > would like to provide a way for downstream consumers (and ourselves) to
> > track new features as they get implemented. The main things that came
> > out of the discussion is that people liked the spec-lite process that
> > the glance team are using.
> > 
> > I'm proposing we would start to use the same process, essentially small
> > features that don't warrant a blueprint would instead have a wishlist
> > bug opened against them and get marked with the spec-lite tag. This bug
> > could then be referenced in the commit messages. For larger features
> > blueprints can still be used. I think the process documented by
> > glance[1] is a good model to follow so go read that and see what you think
> > 
> > The general feeling at the meeting was +1 to doing this[2] so I hope we
> > can soon start enforcing it, assuming people are still happy to proceed?
> > 
> > thanks,
> > Derek.
> > 
> > [1]
> > http://docs.openstack.org/developer/glance/contributing/blueprints.html#glance-spec-lite
> > 
> > [2]
> > http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tripleo/2016/tripleo.2016-01-26-14.02.log.html
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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
> 
> I guess my only thought would be to make the bug/rfe fairly descriptive
> so we don't have to go tracking down whoever reported it for more
> details.  Maybe just some light rules about age and responsiveness so we
> can quickly retire those bugs/rfes that people aren't really paying
> attention to.

Agreed, I'd expect those cores triaging the spec-lite bugs to mark them
incomplete if there's insufficient detail (although this isn't explicitly
mentioned in the glance process[1], it seems well aligned with the existing
bug workflow, so perhaps it's implicit).

I'm not sure on the workflow for retiring RFE bugs - in general I'd expect
RFE bugs to *not* be routinely retired just because they're not implemented
, but they could be marked incomplete or invalid if they look obsolete or
otherwise no longer relevant and allowed to expire that way.

[1] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/glance/contributing/blueprints.html#glance-spec-lite