Open Stack

On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 13:26:48 -0500, Eric Fried wrote:
> 
>> I think the only concern around moving spec freeze out would be that I
>> thought the original purpose of the spec freeze was to set expectations
>> early about what was approved and not approved instead of having folks
>> potentially in the situation where it's technically "maybe" for a large
>> chunk of the cycle. I'm not sure which most people prefer -- would you
>> rather know early and definitively whether your blueprint is
>> approved/not approved or would you rather have the opportunity to get
>> approval during a larger window in the cycle and not know definitively
>> early on? Can anyone else chime in here?
> 
> This is a fair point.
> 
> Putting specs into runways doesn't imply (re)moving spec freeze IMO.
> It's just a way to get us using runways RIGHT NOW, so that folks with
> ready specs can get reviewed sooner, know whether they're approved
> sooner, write their code sooner, and get their *code* into an earlier
> runway.
> 
> A spec in a runway would be treated like anything else: reviewers focus
> on it and the author needs to be available to respond quickly to feedback.
> 
> I would expect the ratio of specs:code in runways to start off high and
> dwindle rapidly as we approach spec freeze.

This would seem to have the same effect as waiting until after spec 
freeze to start using runways for focusing on reviews of 
implementations. And (MHO) I'm not sure we need help in reviewing more 
specs. While it's true that not a lot of people review specs, we do 
still also repeatedly approve more specs than we can complete in a 
cycle, every cycle.

I'd rather keep things simpler and not add spec reviews into the mix at 
this time.

Maybe a good compromise would be to start runways now and move spec 
freeze out to r-2 (Jun 7). That way we have less pressure on spec review 
earlier on, more time to review the current queue of approved 
implementations via runways, and a chance to approve more specs along 
the way if we find we're flushing the queue down enough.

What does everyone think about that?

> It's worth pointing out that there's not an expectation for people to
> work more/harder when runways are in play.  Just that it increases the
> chances of more people looking at the same things at the same time; and
> allows us to bring focus to things that might otherwise languish in
> ignoreland.

Yes, this. The goal IMHO is to make an improvement over what we usually 
do, which is having our review efforts scattered across various approved 
implementations. If we could focus a bit and increase the chances that 
we're reviewing the same things at the same time, I think we might have 
a better completion percentage on approved blueprints in the cycle.

-melanie