Open Stack

Hi,

Done. Mentioned members are added into the openstacksdk-service-core and python-openstackclient-service-core groups. With that they should be having code-review +2 rights

Regards,
Artem

> On 20. Apr 2023, at 13:54, Stephen Finucane <stephenfin at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 2023-04-20 at 16:45 +0530, Rajat Dhasmana wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I was discussing this with Stephen last cycle. The general idea we discussed to review project specific patches was:
>> 1 core from project team to verify the functionality of the patch is as intended
>> 1 core from SDK team to verify the code follows all the conventions of SDK/OSC project
> 
> Just to add, I personally expect this to be a temporary state of affairs. Once folks have a "feel" for how things are expected to work in SDK and OSC, project teams should be able to manage their own destiny. As I've said before, I have enough jobs and I don't want to add "gatekeeping" to that list :)
> 
>> This will ensure we are following proper convention (like how a specific command should be written) and the change
>> we are adding works as expected (calling the right API, accepting/passing the right parameters etc)
>> 
>> On a similar note, Cinder team would also like to nominate its team member(s) for the core position in OSC/SDK.
>> Last cycle, most (if not all) of my changes were reviewed by Stephen and I don't want to put more burden on
>> him for the SDK work I'm planning. :)
>> Let me know about the feasibility of that request and I can initiate a discussion in the Cinder upstream meeting for the
>> interested candidate(s).
> 
> Artem will know more but it sounds like these we'll be adding the core teams for all services to openstacksdk-service-core and openstackclient-service-core, so this will happen then.
> 
> Stephen
> 
>> 
>> Thanks
>> Rajat Dhasmana
>> 
>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 4:21 PM Abhishek Kekane <akekane at redhat.com <mailto:akekane at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 3:33 PM Artem Goncharov <artem.goncharov at gmail.com <mailto:artem.goncharov at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> I have not forgotten and I am on it. However I see that there are too many people in the core group right now from most of which I have not ever a single review. This is becoming a bit too dangerous and I have requested arranging a new group (openstacksdk-service-core and openstackclient-service-core) with only +2 privileges to prevent workflow misuse [1].
>>>> 
>>>> Once this is done I will immediately add mentioned members into the group.
>>>> 
>>>> In the meanwhile I also wanted to hint that there are currently changes for the glance in openstackclient open (well, only 1 open left) and the people mentioned by you are so far not doing code reviews.
>>>> 
>>> Hi Artem,
>>> 
>>> Thanks for pointing it out, the one open is WIP i guess, sorry we didn't notice it earlier. This PTG we decided to dedicate particular resources on  reviewing the glance specific patches. So once new patches are up then you will definitely find reviews from our side on priority basis.
>>> 
>>> @Pranali, please make sure when a patch is submitted the owner adds us as a reviewer to the patches so that we will get immediate notification about the same.
>>> 
>>> Thank you,
>>> 
>>> Abhishek
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Artem
>>>> 
>>>> [1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/project-config/+/880933
>>>> 
>>>>> On 19. Apr 2023, at 12:54, Pranali Deore <pdeore at redhat.com <mailto:pdeore at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 6:52 PM Pranali Deore <pdeore at redhat.com <mailto:pdeore at redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 5, 2023 at 12:57 PM Artem Goncharov <artem.goncharov at gmail.com <mailto:artem.goncharov at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Feedback from SDK/OSC team on one item that got my attention
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> # Bridge gap between Glance client and OSC
>>>>>>>> Last cycle we have prepared the list of missing commands [2] and started submitting patches to implement the same. Our biggest hurdle at the moment is lack of reviews from the osc team (which has only one/two cores). Glance PTL is going to communicate with TC/existing core(s) of OSC whether they can add any glance core to the team so that we can prioritize our work and get reviews immediately. This cycle we are planning to complete this work. 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> At the moment SDK/CLI core group is having 27 members, which should be already a sign. We have an agreement with all teams and add certain members into the core group to be able to review changes for their corresponding services (with a limitation that they are NOT by default setting W+1).
>>>>>>> You have noticed pretty correct - at the moment there is not so much activity on our side due to lack of reviewers. But that is not blocking any change once there is a +2 review from the service representatives. That means that if Glance team opens change and another Glance team member leaves +2 those changes are having absolutely different priority and we normally approving them fast (unless there is something preventing that). What we want to prevent is that every team is pulling project into their direction breaking certain rules or conventions.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Please provide me the list of members you would like to get SDK/CLI core rights and I would gladly add them (one more time - no workflow+1)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Artem
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Hi Artem,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We have the discussion in the team and Abhishek & Cyril are ready to join the SDK/CLI core group to speed up the reviews on glance related changes.
>>>>>> Please provide the SDK/CLI core rights to @Abhishek Kekane <mailto:akekane at redhat.com> & @Cyril Roelandt <mailto:cyril at redhat.com>.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi Artem,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Any updates on adding the glance team members to SDK/CLI core group?
>>>>> Kindly please let us know once you add them. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Pranali
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Pranali Deore 
>>>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20230420/d953c577/attachment.htm>