openstack
/
nova-specs
Code Issues Proposed changes

Add 'Feature Liaison' spec process 

Add a mandatory 'Feature Liaison' section to the spec template,
requiring specs to be sponsored by an experienced nova developer (not
necessarily an actual core -- this is explained in the docs).

This in an effort to mitigate several problems noted in previous
development cycles:
- Inexperienced contributors don't understand how nova dev culture works
- "Nobody but me cares about my feature"
- "Whom should I ask for reviews first, especially if I don't even know
  whether I'm ready for them?"

The current commit edits already-approved specs to include the new
section.

The main README is updated with a new section to describe more
thoroughly what this feature liaison thing is. At the same time, since
this impacts several aspects of the process, the remainder of the README
is tweaked and updated accordingly. Of note:

* We're now going to make distinct use of the launchpad blueprint's
  "Definition" and "Direction" fields. As such, we can still decide to
  defer a blueprint whose spec is merged in the 'approved' directory.
  (Which really isn't different than what we were doing before; it's
  just that now we can do it for reasons other than "oops, this didn't
  get finished in time".)
* The single-core-approval rule for previously approved specifications
  is removed [1].

[1] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-nova/%23openstack-nova.2019-10-03.log.html#t2019-10-03T16:08:05

Change-Id: Ibb3a2990e23aecf3ea7ebc1b47413396b676f2d6
This commit is contained in:
Eric Fried 2019-09-30 17:53:17 -05:00
parent 51496fd901
commit a142175578
10 changed files with 228 additions and 55 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

205
README.rst
View File

@ -23,48 +23,58 @@ specs/<release>/approved
specs/<release>/implemented
implemented specifications
The lifecycle of a specification
--------------------------------
Developers proposing a specification should propose a new file in the
``approved`` directory. nova-specs-core will review the change in the usual
manner for the OpenStack project, and eventually it will get merged if a
consensus is reached. At this time the Launchpad blueprint is also approved.
The developer is then free to propose code reviews to implement their
specification. These reviews should be sure to reference the Launchpad
blueprint in their commit message for tracking purposes.
Once all code for the feature is merged into Nova, the Launchpad blueprint is
marked complete. As the developer of an approved specification it is your
responsibility to mark your blueprint complete when all of the required
patches have merged.
Periodically, someone from nova-specs-core will move implemented specifications
from the ``approved`` directory to the ``implemented`` directory. Whilst
individual developers are welcome to propose this move for their implemented
specifications, we have generally just done this in a batch at the end of the
release cycle. It is important to create redirects when this is done so that
existing links to the approved specification are not broken. Redirects aren't
symbolic links, they are defined in a file which sphinx consumes. An example
is at ``specs/kilo/redirects``.
.. note:: Use the ``tox -e move-implemented-specs`` target at the end of each
release to automatically move completed specs and populate the
redirects file for that release. For example::
tox -r -e move-implemented-specs -- --dry-run --verbose newton
Remove the ``--dry-run`` flag to perform the actual file
moves/writes.
This directory structure allows you to see what we thought about doing,
decided to do, and actually got done. Users interested in functionality in a
given release should only refer to the ``implemented`` directory.
The lifecycle of a specification
--------------------------------
Developers proposing a specification should propose a new file in the
``approved`` directory. `nova-specs-core
<https://review.opendev.org/#/admin/groups/302,members>`_ will review the
change in the usual manner for the OpenStack project, and eventually it will
get merged if a consensus is reached.
At this time the Launchpad blueprint is also "Definition" approved. The
developer is then free to propose code reviews to implement their
specification. These reviews should be sure to reference the Launchpad
blueprint in their commit message for tracking purposes.
.. note:: The launchpad blueprint's "Definition" approval indicates that the
nova-specs-core team agrees with the technical aspects of the
proposal ("if we are going to do this, this is how"). The blueprint's
"Direction" approval is a separate indication of commitment to the
targeted release ("we want to do this now"). It is possible to have a
specification and blueprint "Definition" approved, but not have its
"Direction" approved due to subsequent planning activities. In such
cases, the blueprint (and any unmerged code) could be deferred for
consideration in a future release.
.. todo:: Document the specifics of these "planning activities".
Once all code for the feature is merged into Nova, the Launchpad blueprint is
marked "Implemented" by a nova maintainer.
At the end of the release cycle, implemented specifications are moved from the
``approved`` directory to the ``implemented`` directory, creating redirects so
that existing links to the approved specification are not broken. (Redirects
aren't symbolic links, they are defined in a file which sphinx consumes. An
example is at ``specs/stein/redirects``.)
We use the ``tox -e move-implemented-specs`` target at the end of each release
to automatically move completed specs and populate the redirects file for that
release. For example::
tox -r -e move-implemented-specs -- --dry-run --verbose train
Remove the ``--dry-run`` flag to perform the actual file moves/writes. Then
commit the changes and submit the review to gerrit as usual.
Example specifications
----------------------
You can find an example spec for a given release in
You can find a spec template for a given release in
``specs/<release>-template.rst``.
Backlog specifications
@ -91,7 +101,8 @@ a fashion similar to the process for ``implemented`` specs above. The
tox -e move-spec -- --dry-run --verbose specs/backlog/my-great-idea.rst specs/train/approved
Remove the ``--dry-run`` option to perform the actual file moves/writes.
Remove the ``--dry-run`` option to perform the actual file moves/writes. Then
commit the changes and submit the review to gerrit as usual.
.. note:: Please do not use ``move-spec`` to repropose an unimplemented spec
from one release to another. Instead follow the instructions at
@ -140,12 +151,12 @@ For more information about working with gerrit, see
http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#development-workflow
To validate that the specification is syntactically correct (i.e. get more
confidence in the Jenkins result), please execute the following command::
confidence in the Zuul result), please execute the following command::
$ tox
After running ``tox``, the documentation will be available for viewing in HTML
format in the ``doc/build/`` directory.
format in the ``doc/build/html/`` directory.
Specification review policies
=============================
@ -160,34 +171,41 @@ Proposed changes which are trivial (very small amounts of code) and don't
change any of our public APIs are sometimes not required to provide a
specification. In these cases a Launchpad blueprint is considered sufficient.
These proposals are approved during the `Open Discussion` portion of the
weekly nova IRC meeting. If you think your proposed feature is trivial and
weekly `nova IRC meeting`_. If you think your proposed feature is trivial and
meets these requirements, we recommend you bring it up for discussion there
before writing a full specification.
Previously approved specifications
----------------------------------
`Specifications are only approved for a single release`. If your specification
was previously approved but not implemented (or not completely implemented),
then you must seek re-approval for the specification. You can re-propose your
specification by doing the following:
**Specifications are only approved for a single release**. If your
specification was previously approved but not implemented (or not completely
implemented), then you must seek re-approval for the specification. You can
re-propose your specification by doing the following:
* Copy (not move) your specification to the right directory for the current release.
* Update the document to comply with the new template.
* If there are no functional changes to the specification (only template changes) then add the `Previously-approved: <release>` tag to your commit message.
* Update the document to comply with the new template; modify the History
section; select a new :ref:`feature liaison <feature-liaisons>` if needed.
* If there are no functional changes to the specification (only template
changes) then add the ``Previously-approved: <release>`` tag to your commit
message.
* Send for review.
* nova-specs-core will merge specifications which meet these requirements with a single +2.
* These specifications are subject to the same review process as any other.
They need to be reevaluated to ensure the technical aspects are still valid
and that we still wish to implement it given resource constraints and other
priorities.
Specifications which depend on merging code in other OpenStack projects
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For specifications `that depend on code in other OpenStack projects merging`
For specifications **that depend on code in other OpenStack projects merging**
we will not approve the nova specification until the code in that other project
has merged. The best example of this is Cinder and Neutron drivers. To
indicate your specification is in this state, please use the Depends-On git
commit message tag. The correct format is `Depends-On: <change id of other
work>`. nova-specs-core can approve the specification at any time, but it wont
merge until the code we need to land in the other project has merged as well.
commit message tag. The correct format is ``Depends-On: <change id of other
work>``. nova-specs-core can approve the specification at any time, but it
won't merge until the code we need to land in the other project has merged as
well.
New libvirt image backends
--------------------------
@ -196,5 +214,90 @@ There are some cases where an author might propose adding a new libvirt
driver image storage backend which does not require code in other OpenStack
projects. An example was the ceph image storage backend, if we treat that as
separate from the ceph volume support code. Implementing a new image storage
backend in the libvirt drive always requires a specification because of our
backend in the libvirt driver always requires a specification because of our
historical concerns around adequate CI testing.
.. todo:: Write a fleshed-out section on the roles and responsibilities of the
nova team, including things like the two +2 rule, the same-company
trifecta rule, whether +2ing a spec represents a commitment to review
the corresponding code, etc.
.. _feature-liaisons:
Feature Liaison FAQ
===================
In Ussuri, a mandatory "Feature Liaison" section was added to the spec
template. This section attempts to address some of the questions around this
concept.
What does a Feature Liaison do?
By signing up to be a feature liaison for a spec, you're agreeing to help
shepherd the feature through the development process. This has different
implications depending on the identity/role of the spec owner and your
relative roles in the project. Some examples:
* **Liaison for an inexperienced contributor:** This is the case for which
the liaison concept was conceived. In this case the liaison's job is to
mentor the spec owner, keep an eye on their progress, let them know when
they're missing some obscure (or not-so-obscure) part of the process, help
them understand what "review-ready" means, etc. You are also committing to
reviewing their code -- or at the very least helping them track down
suitable reviewers.
* **Designating yourself as your own liaison:** If you're a nova core or
experienced nova developer, you're already culturally indoctrinated. You
know how to navigate the process. You know how to ask for reviews. You
still can't +1/+2 your own code.
* **Core or experienced nova dev procures separate liaison:** Since you don't
need the mentorship aspect, your liaison in this case is really just
committing to doing reviews. While not necessary, it might be nice to get
that kind of commitment up front.
The above is not exhaustive; clearly there is a lot of middle ground between
an inexperienced contributor and a nova-core as a spec owner. It should
hopefully be fairly obvious how the liaison's role shifts in that middle
ground. If further clarification is necessary, please edit this doc.
Feature Liaison need not be a nova-core.
The role of a liaison does not require +2 powers. A feature liaison should be
taken to mean "experienced nova developer capable of doing the job". That
said, whereas nova cores implicitly match that description by virtue of
having been made cores, non-cores proposed as liaisons should be evaluated on
a case-by-case basis (by the reviewers of the spec) as part of the spec
review process to determine whether they qualify. For the most part, "we know
who you are". (Note that in cases where an experienced non-core is a liaison
for someone else's feature, they're still signing up to do reviews, which are
still valuable despite maxing out at +1.)
How do I find a Feature Liaison?
If you do not already have agreement from someone to act as your liaison,
note this in your spec draft. You may accelerate the process by communicating
with the nova development team on IRC (``#openstack-nova``), in a `nova IRC
meeting`_, or via the `openstack-discuss`_ mailing list.
What about specless blueprints?
We'll put the name of the feature liaison into the blueprint description.
It's not as automatically-enforceable as the template checker, but oh well.
How does liaison-hood relate to blueprint approval and prioritization?
It really doesn't. If you sign up to be a liaison for blueprint X, the nova
team may still decide blueprint X is a nonstarter for technical reasons; or
that we don't have the bandwidth to get it done this cycle in light of other
priorities. You're really just saying, "If this goes, I'm on it."
How does liaison-hood relate to the gerrit review for the spec?
A liaison can (and really should, though it's not a hard requirement (yet))
review and +2/+1 a spec for which they're the liaison (but not the owner).
However, everyone is still encouraged to review and approve other specs as
well (otherwise nothing will get done) (also see below). (It would be nice if
an upvote on a spec patch also acted as a commitment to review the
corresponding code, but the liaison process does not attempt to address
that (yet).)
Am I still allowed to care about / review / shepherd other approved features for which I didn't volunteer to be a liaison?
Of course. The point of this is the converse: If you *don't* pay attention to
features you *did* sign up for, people will draw moustaches on pictures of
your face. Or horns, if you already have a moustache.
.. _`nova IRC meeting`: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Nova
.. _openstack-discuss: http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-discuss

25
specs/ussuri-template.rst
View File

@ -348,6 +348,31 @@ Primary assignee:
Other contributors:
<launchpad-id or None>
Feature Liaison
---------------
Feature work must be sponsored by a member of the `nova core team`_ or
other experienced and active nova developer. The purpose of a liaison is
to:
* Mentor developers through the arcana of nova's development processes.
* Advocate for (aka "care about") the feature to the rest of the nova team.
* Be the initial go-to for reviews.
See the :ref:`feature-liaisons` for more details.
Feature liaison:
<name and/or nick>
* If you do not already have agreement from a nova developer to act as
your liaison, you may write "Liaison Needed" here and/or in your
commit message.
* If you are a core or experienced nova dev, you need not have a
separate liaison; if you wish, you may just assign yourself, or put
"None"/"N/A".
.. _`nova core team`: https://review.opendev.org/#/admin/groups/25,members
Work Items
----------

9
specs/ussuri/approved/add-user-id-field-to-the-migrations-table.rst
View File

@ -209,9 +209,18 @@ Implementation
==============
Assignee(s)
-----------
.. todo:: Make this Brinh https://review.opendev.org/#/c/685857/3/specs/ussuri/approved/add-user-id-field-to-the-migrations-table.rst@213
Primary assignee:
Brin Zhang
Feature Liaison
---------------
Feature liaison:
mriedem
Work Items
----------
* Add ``user_id`` and ``project_id`` to the ``migrations`` table and

6
specs/ussuri/approved/cross-cell-resize.rst
View File

@ -685,6 +685,12 @@ Primary assignee:
Other contributors:
None
Feature Liaison
---------------
Feature liaison:
mriedem
Work Items
----------

6
specs/ussuri/approved/image-metadata-prefiltering.rst
View File

@ -270,6 +270,12 @@ Assignee(s)
sean-k-mooney
Feature Liaison
---------------
Feature liaison:
sean-k-mooney
Work Items
----------

6
specs/ussuri/approved/image-precache-support.rst
View File

@ -247,6 +247,12 @@ Assignee(s)
Primary assignee:
danms
Feature Liaison
---------------
Feature liaison:
danms
Work Items
----------

6
specs/ussuri/approved/nova-cyborg-interaction.rst
View File

@ -399,6 +399,12 @@ Assignee(s)
Sundar Nadathur
Feature Liaison
---------------
Feature liaison:
efried
Work Items
----------

6
specs/ussuri/approved/openstacksdk-in-nova.rst
View File

@ -203,6 +203,12 @@ Primary assignee:
Other contributors:
mordred <mordred@inaugust.com>, dtantsur <dtantsur@protonmail.com>
Feature Liaison
---------------
Feature liaison:
efried
Work Items
----------

8
specs/ussuri/approved/provider-config-file.rst
View File

@ -312,6 +312,12 @@ Primary assignee:
Other contributors:
efried dakshinai
Feature Liaison
---------------
Feature liaison:
efried
Work Items
----------
@ -360,4 +366,4 @@ History
* - Train
- Reintroduced, simplified
* - Ussuri
- Reintroduced
- Reintroduced

6
specs/ussuri/approved/support-move-ops-with-qos-ports-ussuri.rst
View File

@ -157,10 +157,10 @@ Primary assignee:
Other contributors:
None
Core Liaison
------------
Feature Liaison
---------------
Core liaison:
Feature liaison:
mriedem
Work Items