Open Stack

Excerpts from Nikhil Komawar's message of 2016-05-12 01:44:06 -0400:
> Hello all,
> 
> Here are a few important announcements for the members involved in the
> Glance community.
> 
> 
> Priorities:
> 
> =======
> 
> * The Glance priorities for Newton were discussed at the contributors'
> meetup at summit.
> 
> * There are a few items that were carried forward from Mitaka that are
> still our priorities and there are a couple of items from the summit
> that we have made a priority for reviews.
> 
> Code review priority:
> 
> * Import refactor

Is "Import refactor" what you're calling the work on the new API to get
images into glance to solve the DefCore compatibility issue?

Doug

> 
> * Nova v1, v2 support
> 
> * Image sharing changes
> 
> * Documentation changes [1], [2]
> 
> 
> The required attention from Glance team on Nova v1, v2 support is
> minimal; the people who are actively involved should review the code and
> the spec.
> 
> 
> Everyone is encouraged to review the Import refactor work however, if
> you do not know where to start you can join the informal syncs on
> #openstack-glance Thursdays at 1330 UTC. If you do not see people
> chatting you are more than encouraged to highlight the following irc
> nicks: rosmaita, nikhil (to the very least)
> 
> 
> Everyone is encouraged to review the Image sharing changes that are
> currently being discussed. Although, the constructs are not going to
> hamper the standard image workflows, the experiences of sharing may be
> different after these changes. There will be subsequent changes to the
> python-glanceclient for accommodating server changes.
> 
> 
> Documentation changes are something that we must accommodate in this
> cycle; thanks to the docs team the code draft was given to us.
> Documentation liaison is working hard to get it in the right shape and a
> couple more reviewers are to be assigned to review this change. We need
> volunteers for the review work.
> 
> 
> Process to be adopted in Newton:
> 
> ==========================
> 
> 
> Full specs:
> 
> * For all newly introduced features, API Impacting changes and changes
> that could either have an impact security or larger impact on operators
> will need a full spec against the openstack/glance-specs repo.
> 
> * For each spec, you need to create a corresponding blueprint in
> launchpad [3] and indicate your intention to target that spec in the
> newton milestone. You will want to be judicious on selecting the
> milestone; if we see too many proposals for a particular milestone
> glance-core team will have to selectively reject some of those or move
> to a different milestone. Please set the url of the spec on your blueprint.
> 
> * Please use the template for the full spec [4] and try to complete it
> as much as possible. A spec that is missing some critical info is likely
> to not get feedback.
> 
> * Only blueprints by themselves will not be reviewed. You need a spec
> associated with a blueprint to get the proposal reviewed.
> 
> * The reviewers section [5] is very important for us to determine if the
> team will have enough time to review your spec and code. This
> information plays important role in planning and prioritize your spec.
> Reach out to these core-reviewer nicks [6] on #openstack-glance channel
> to see who is interested in assigning themselves to your spec.
> 
> * Please make sure that each spec has the problem statement well
> defined. The problem statement isn't a one liner that indicates -- it
> would be nice to have this change, admins should do operations that user
> can't, Glance should do so and so, etc. Problem statement should
> elaborate your use case and explain what in Glance or OpenStack can be
> improved, what exists currently, if any, why would it be beneficial to
> make this change, how would the view of cloud change after this change, etc.
> 
> * All full specs require +W from PTL/liaison
> 
> 
> Lite specs:
> 
> * All proposals that are expected to change the behavior of the system
> significantly are required to have a lite-spec.
> 
> * For a lite-spec you do not need a blueprint filed and you don't need
> to target it to particular milestones. Glance would accept most
> lite-specs until newton-3 unless a cross-project or another conflicting
> change is a blocker.
> 
> * Please make sure that each lite-spec has a well defined problem
> statement. The problem statement is NOT a one liner that indicates -- it
> would be nice to have this change, admins should do operations such
> operations that user can't, Glance should do so and so, etc. Problem
> statement should elaborate your use case and explain what in Glance or
> OpenStack can be improved, what exists currently, if any, why would it
> be beneficial to make this change, how would the view of cloud change
> after this change, etc.
> 
> * All lite specs should have at least two +2 (agreement from at least
> two core reviewers). There is no need to wait on +W from the PTL but it
> is highly encouraged to consult a liaison (module expert).
> 
> * Lite specs can be merged irrespective of the spec freeze dates.
> 
> 
> Important dates to remember:
> 
> =======================
> 
> * June 2, R-18: newton-1
> 
> * June 17, R-16: Spec soft freeze, Glance mid-cycle (15th-17th)
> (depending on attendance). If you've already booked travel contact me ASAP.
> 
> * July 14, R-12: newton-2
> 
> * Jul 29, R-10: Spec hard freeze
> 
> * Aug 23, R-6: final glance_store release
> 
> * Aug 30, R-5: newton-3, lite-spec freeze, feature freeze, final
> glanceclient release, soft string freeze
> 
> * Sept 13, R-3: RC1, hard string freeze
> 
> * Oct 7, R+0: Newton release
> 
> 
> Spec owners and reviewers:
> 
> ======================
> 
> * Currently there are 12 Glance core reviewers with some on hiatus, some
> part time core reviewers (even less than 50%) and a few others with more
> than 70% upstream time.
> 
> * I have consolidated some information that we effectively have a little
> more than 5 core reviewers with 100% upstream time. I hope to improve
> that over the next couple of months if enough people are interested in
> contributing upstream who have already expressed in reviewing more
> Glance code.
> 
> * So, while we would ideally be able to knock out 6 full specs in a
> cycle (with each spec requiring at least two cores associated with it),
> with current effectiveness we would like to target 2-3 specs depending
> on the size of the changes.
> 
> * All spec owners are highly encouraged to start a conversation with one
> or two of the core-reviewers mentioned in [6] and see the possibility of
> having 'champions' on those specs.
> 
> * While the associated core reviewers are not required to review the
> entire set of patches associated with that spec, they do however are a
> point of contact, for representing Glance's point of view on the spec.
> 
> * If you are looking to associate yourself as a reviewer to a spec and
> do not know which one you should pick, feel free to reach out to me.
> 
> * Also, if you are looking to make your mark and trying to work your way
> into the core team, it will be highly appreciated if you assign yourself
> to an important spec and help them drive the feature.
> 
> 
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/2016-May/008536.html
> 
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/312259
> 
> [3] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance
> 
> [4] https://github.com/openstack/glance-specs/blob/master/specs/template.rst
> 
> [5]
> https://github.com/openstack/glance-specs/blob/master/specs/template.rst#reviewers
> 
> [6] core-reviewer nicks: rosmaita, jokke_, flwang, flaper87, hemanthm,
> sigmavirus24, kairat, kragniz, mfedosin, nikhil, sabari, mclaren
> 
> [7] https://review.openstack.org/315347
>