Open Stack

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 5:23 PM, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
> 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.

Well said Jeremy!

> --
> Jeremy Stanley
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims