Open Stack

On Mar 21, 2016 3:28 PM, "Tim Bell" <Tim.Bell at cern.ch> wrote:

>
> On 21/03/16 17:24, "Markus Zoeller" <mzoeller at de.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> >Hello dear ops,
> >
> >I'd like to make you aware of discussion [1] on the openstack-dev ML.
> >I'm in the role of maintaining the bug list in Nova and was looking
> >for a way to gain an overview again over our ~950 open bug reports.
> >My idea was to redirect the RFEs away from the Nova bug list, to make
> >that a list of reports which describe only faulty behaviors in existing
> >features [2] (see section "Alternative to wishlist bugs").
> >
> >Long story short, what are your opinions/ideas of RFE handling?
>
> Pleased to see this discussion is underway to encourage the feedback loop
> and lower the barrier for improvement suggestions.
>
> To check I understand the proposal,
>
> - We stop raising wishlist bugs
> - We send an e-mail to the ops list with [RFE] for discussion and review
> of alternatives
>
> My only concerns are
>
> 1. How to get from the [RFE] agreed stage to a blueprint with
> implementation proposal ?
> 2. In the current blueprint process, I can +1 a spec to support the
> proposal. How can we identify the RFEs with the strongest community support
> ?
> 3. How can the various Ops working groups (
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee)
> which could help with this process ?
>
> Tim
>
>
>

I'd also like to know what the discovery process will be? How will a new
user know to do this? A bug-bot that will close all Wishlist items? If you
don't solve that then you won't solve the issue of open wishlist bugs.

Let's also avoid making the barrier to entry too high. "Go write a spec" is
not a great response to a feature idea, although it may reduce spurious
feature requests it may also mean that you don't get any at all.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20160321/956125ba/attachment.html>