Open Stack

On 2018-05-30 14:50:11 -0700 (-0700), Davanum Srinivas wrote:
[...]
> Let me poke at this a bit. Some of the projects do say (not in so
> many words):
> 
> "master should be always deployable and fully backward compatible and
> so we cant let anything in anytime that could possibly regress anyone"
> 
> Should we change that attitude too? Anyone agree? disagree?

I think this is orthogonal to the thread. The idea is that we should
avoid nettling contributors over minor imperfections in their
submissions (grammatical, spelling or typographical errors in code
comments and documentation, mild inefficiencies in implementations,
et cetera). Clearly we shouldn't merge broken features, changes
which fail tests/linters, and so on. For me the rule of thumb is,
"will the software be better or worse if this is merged?" It's not
about perfection or imperfection, it's about incremental
improvement. If a proposed change is an improvement, that's enough.
If it's not perfect... well, that's just opportunity for more
improvement later.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20180531/160f9481/attachment.sig>