5d8aaf855f
We should suggest authors to cover OSC in their specs, since now it's a requirement that new features that introduce new commands introduce support for the official OpenStack client and not (just) for neutronclient. http://docs.openstack.org/developer/python-neutronclient/devref/transition_to_osc.html#developer-guide Change-Id: Ic8786999f35cbf2b5f4959232455d9d2d305894a
83 lines
3.1 KiB
ReStructuredText
83 lines
3.1 KiB
ReStructuredText
..
|
|
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
|
License.
|
|
|
|
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
|
|
|
====================================
|
|
Example Spec - The title of your RFE
|
|
====================================
|
|
|
|
Include the URL of your launchpad RFE:
|
|
|
|
https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/example-id
|
|
|
|
Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing this feature? A single paragraph of
|
|
prose that **deployers, and developers, and operators** can understand.
|
|
|
|
Do you even need to file a spec? Most features can be done by filing an RFE bug
|
|
and moving on with life. In most cases, filing an RFE and documenting your
|
|
design in the devref folder of neutron docs is sufficient. If the feature
|
|
seems very large or contentious, then the drivers team may request a spec, or
|
|
you can always file one if desired.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Problem Description
|
|
===================
|
|
|
|
A detailed description of the problem:
|
|
|
|
* For a new feature this should be a list of use cases. Ensure that you are clear
|
|
about the actors in each use case: End User vs Deployer. Ensure that you identify
|
|
which area of the core is being affected; for something completely new, it
|
|
should be clear why you are considering it being part of the core.
|
|
|
|
* For a major reworking of something existing it would describe the
|
|
problems in that feature that are being addressed.
|
|
|
|
Note that the RFE filed for this feature will have a description already. This
|
|
section is not meant to simply duplicate that; you can simply refer to that
|
|
description if it is sufficient, and use this space to capture changes to
|
|
the description based on bug comments or feedback on the spec.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed Change
|
|
===============
|
|
|
|
How do you propose to solve this problem?
|
|
|
|
This section is optional, and provides an area to discuss your high-level
|
|
design at the same time as use cases, if desired. Note that by high-level,
|
|
we mean the "view from orbit" rough cut at how things will happen.
|
|
|
|
This section should 'scope' the effort from a feature standpoint: how is the
|
|
'neutron end-to-end system' going to look like after this change? What Neutron
|
|
areas do you intend to touch and how do you intend to work on them? The list
|
|
below is not meant to be a template to fill in, but rather a jumpstart on the
|
|
sorts of areas to consider in your proposed change description.
|
|
|
|
* Am I going to see new CLI commands?
|
|
* Is OpenStack CLI covered in addition to neutronclient?
|
|
* How do you intend to support or affect aspects like:
|
|
* Address Management, e.g. IPv6, DHCP
|
|
* Routing, e.g. DVR/HA
|
|
* Plugins, ML2 Drivers, e.g. OVS, LinuxBridge
|
|
* Agents, e.g. metadata
|
|
* High level services, e.g. *-aas.
|
|
* Scheduling, quota, and policy management, e.g. admin vs user rights
|
|
* API and extensions
|
|
* Clients
|
|
* Impact on services or out-of-tree plugins/drivers
|
|
* What do you intend to not support in the initial release?
|
|
|
|
You do not need to detail API or data model changes. Details at that level of
|
|
granularity belong in the neutron devref docs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
References
|
|
==========
|
|
|
|
Please add any useful references here. You are not required to have any
|
|
reference. Moreover, this specification should still make sense when your
|
|
references are unavailable.
|