Fix spec template formatting
No change to any verbiage here. Just comply with the following formatting requirement in the template: * Please wrap text at 79 columns. Change-Id: I02871d2d999ccd6063720e66b6de0cb3b666018d Signed-off-by: Robert Church <robert.church@windriver.com>
This commit is contained in:
Robert Church
parent
f7c04656d8
commit
08ff127d4b
@ -1,6 +1,10 @@
|
||||
.. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
..
|
||||
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
|
||||
License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
|
||||
|
||||
.. Many thanks to the OpenStack Nova team for the Example Spec that formed the basis for this document.
|
||||
..
|
||||
Many thanks to the OpenStack Nova team for the Example Spec that formed the
|
||||
basis for this document.
|
||||
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
StarlingX: Example Spec
|
||||
@ -8,25 +12,23 @@ StarlingX: Example Spec
|
||||
|
||||
Some notes about the Spec process:
|
||||
|
||||
* The aim of this document is first to define the problem we need to solve,
|
||||
and second agree on the overall approach to solve that problem.
|
||||
* The aim of this document is first to define the problem we need to solve, and
|
||||
second agree on the overall approach to solve that problem.
|
||||
|
||||
* This is not intended to be extensive documentation for a new feature.
|
||||
For example, there is no need to specify the exact configuration changes,
|
||||
nor the exact details of any DB model changes. But you should still define
|
||||
that such changes are required, and be clear on how that will affect
|
||||
upgrades.
|
||||
* This is not intended to be extensive documentation for a new feature. For
|
||||
example, there is no need to specify the exact configuration changes, nor the
|
||||
exact details of any DB model changes. But you should still define that such
|
||||
changes are required, and be clear on how that will affect upgrades.
|
||||
|
||||
* You should aim to get your spec approved before writing your code.
|
||||
While you are free to write prototypes and code before getting your spec
|
||||
approved, its possible that the outcome of the spec review process leads
|
||||
you towards a fundamentally different solution than you first envisaged.
|
||||
* You should aim to get your spec approved before writing your code. While you
|
||||
are free to write prototypes and code before getting your spec approved, its
|
||||
possible that the outcome of the spec review process leads you towards a
|
||||
fundamentally different solution than you first envisaged.
|
||||
|
||||
* But, API changes are held to a much higher level of scrutiny.
|
||||
As soon as an API change merges, we must assume it could be in production
|
||||
somewhere, and as such, we then need to support that API change forever.
|
||||
To avoid getting that wrong, we do want lots of details about API changes
|
||||
upfront.
|
||||
* But, API changes are held to a much higher level of scrutiny. As soon as an
|
||||
API change merges, we must assume it could be in production somewhere, and as
|
||||
such, we then need to support that API change forever. To avoid getting that
|
||||
wrong, we do want lots of details about API changes upfront.
|
||||
|
||||
Some notes about using this template:
|
||||
|
||||
@ -34,12 +36,13 @@ Some notes about using this template:
|
||||
|
||||
* Please wrap text at 79 columns.
|
||||
|
||||
* The filename in the git repository should include the StoryBoard number and name,
|
||||
for example a Story at https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/1234567
|
||||
should be named [category]_1234567-feature-name.rst (refer to instructions.rst
|
||||
for guidelines on a suitable category name)
|
||||
* The filename in the git repository should include the StoryBoard number and
|
||||
name, for example a Story at
|
||||
https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/1234567 should be named
|
||||
[category]_1234567-feature-name.rst (refer to instructions.rst for guidelines
|
||||
on a suitable category name)
|
||||
|
||||
* Please do not delete any of the sections in this template. If you have
|
||||
* Please do not delete any of the sections in this template. If you have
|
||||
nothing to say for a whole section, just write: None
|
||||
|
||||
* For help with syntax, see http://sphinx-doc.org/rest.html
|
||||
@ -48,11 +51,11 @@ Some notes about using this template:
|
||||
HTML file in doc/build/html/specs/<path_of_your_file>
|
||||
|
||||
* If you would like to provide a diagram with your spec, ascii diagrams are
|
||||
required. http://asciiflow.com/ is a very nice tool to assist with making
|
||||
ascii diagrams. The reason for this is that the tool used to review specs is
|
||||
based purely on plain text. Plain text will allow review to proceed without
|
||||
having to look at additional files which can not be viewed in gerrit. It
|
||||
will also allow inline feedback on the diagram itself.
|
||||
required. http://asciiflow.com/ is a very nice tool to assist with making
|
||||
ascii diagrams. The reason for this is that the tool used to review specs is
|
||||
based purely on plain text. Plain text will allow review to proceed without
|
||||
having to look at additional files which can not be viewed in gerrit. It will
|
||||
also allow inline feedback on the diagram itself.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Example Spec - The title of your blueprint
|
||||
@ -60,24 +63,26 @@ Example Spec - The title of your blueprint
|
||||
|
||||
Include the URL of your Storyboard Story:
|
||||
|
||||
Storyboard: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/list?status=active&project_group_id=86
|
||||
Storyboard:
|
||||
https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/list?status=active&project_group_id=86
|
||||
|
||||
Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing anything? The essential "Why" or motivation is key to laying the ground for the work ahead. It provides contexts for all involved in the work. A single paragraph of
|
||||
prose that operators can understand. The title and this first paragraph
|
||||
should be used as the subject line and body of the commit message
|
||||
respectively.
|
||||
Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing anything? The essential "Why" or
|
||||
motivation is key to laying the ground for the work ahead. It provides contexts
|
||||
for all involved in the work. A single paragraph of prose that operators can
|
||||
understand. The title and this first paragraph should be used as the subject
|
||||
line and body of the commit message respectively.
|
||||
|
||||
Problem description
|
||||
===================
|
||||
|
||||
A detailed description of the problem. What problem is this spec
|
||||
addressing?
|
||||
A detailed description of the problem. What problem is this spec addressing?
|
||||
|
||||
Use Cases
|
||||
=========
|
||||
|
||||
What use cases does this address? What impact on actors does this change have?
|
||||
Ensure you are clear about the actors/personas in each use case: Developer, End User, Deployer etc.
|
||||
Ensure you are clear about the actors/personas in each use case: Developer, End
|
||||
User, Deployer etc.
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
@ -89,24 +94,25 @@ If this is one part of a larger effort make it clear where this piece ends. In
|
||||
other words, what's the scope of this effort?
|
||||
|
||||
At this point, if you would like to just get feedback on if the problem and
|
||||
proposed change fit in StarlingX, you can stop here and post this for review to get preliminary feedback. If so please say:
|
||||
Posting to get preliminary feedback on the scope of this spec.
|
||||
proposed change fit in StarlingX, you can stop here and post this for review to
|
||||
get preliminary feedback. If so please say: Posting to get preliminary feedback
|
||||
on the scope of this spec.
|
||||
|
||||
Alternatives
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
What other ways could we do this thing? Why aren't we using those? This
|
||||
doesn't have to be a full literature review, but it should demonstrate that
|
||||
thought has been put into why the proposed solution is an appropriate one.
|
||||
What other ways could we do this thing? Why aren't we using those? This doesn't
|
||||
have to be a full literature review, but it should demonstrate that thought has
|
||||
been put into why the proposed solution is an appropriate one.
|
||||
|
||||
Data model impact
|
||||
=================
|
||||
|
||||
Changes which require modifications to the data model often have a wider
|
||||
impact on the system. The community often has strong opinions on how the data
|
||||
model should be evolved, from both a functional and performance perspective.
|
||||
It is therefore important to capture and gain agreement as early as possible
|
||||
on any proposed changes to the data model.
|
||||
Changes which require modifications to the data model often have a wider impact
|
||||
on the system. The community often has strong opinions on how the data model
|
||||
should be evolved, from both a functional and performance perspective. It is
|
||||
therefore important to capture and gain agreement as early as possible on any
|
||||
proposed changes to the data model.
|
||||
|
||||
Questions which need to be addressed by this section should include:
|
||||
|
||||
@ -122,54 +128,53 @@ REST API impact
|
||||
|
||||
Each API method which is either added or changed should have the following
|
||||
|
||||
* Specification for the method : As best as can be determined at
|
||||
the definition stage.
|
||||
* Specification for the method : As best as can be determined at the definition
|
||||
stage.
|
||||
|
||||
* Parameters which can be passed via the url
|
||||
|
||||
* Example use case including typical API samples for both data supplied
|
||||
by the caller and the response
|
||||
* Example use case including typical API samples for both data supplied by the
|
||||
caller and the response
|
||||
|
||||
* Discuss any policy changes, and discuss what things a deployer needs to
|
||||
think about when defining their policy.
|
||||
* Discuss any policy changes, and discuss what things a deployer needs to think
|
||||
about when defining their policy.
|
||||
|
||||
Note that the schema should be defined as restrictively as
|
||||
possible. Parameters which are required should be marked as such and
|
||||
only under exceptional circumstances should additional parameters
|
||||
which are not defined in the schema be permitted (eg
|
||||
additionaProperties should be False).
|
||||
Note that the schema should be defined as restrictively as possible. Parameters
|
||||
which are required should be marked as such and only under exceptional
|
||||
circumstances should additional parameters which are not defined in the schema
|
||||
be permitted (eg additionaProperties should be False).
|
||||
|
||||
Reuse of existing predefined parameter types such as regexps for
|
||||
passwords and user defined names is highly encouraged.
|
||||
Reuse of existing predefined parameter types such as regexps for passwords and
|
||||
user defined names is highly encouraged.
|
||||
|
||||
Security impact
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
Describe any potential security impact on the system. Some of the items to
|
||||
Describe any potential security impact on the system. Some of the items to
|
||||
consider include:
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change touch sensitive data such as tokens, keys, or user data?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change alter the API in a way that may impact security, such as
|
||||
a new way to access sensitive information or a new way to login?
|
||||
* Does this change alter the API in a way that may impact security, such as a
|
||||
new way to access sensitive information or a new way to login?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change involve cryptography or hashing?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change require the use of sudo or any elevated privileges?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change involve using or parsing user-provided data? This could
|
||||
be directly at the API level or indirectly such as changes to a cache layer.
|
||||
* Does this change involve using or parsing user-provided data? This could be
|
||||
directly at the API level or indirectly such as changes to a cache layer.
|
||||
|
||||
* Can this change enable a resource exhaustion attack, such as allowing a
|
||||
single API interaction to consume significant server resources? Some examples
|
||||
of this include launching subprocesses for each connection, or entity
|
||||
expansion attacks in XML.
|
||||
|
||||
For more detailed guidance, please see the OpenStack Security Guidelines as
|
||||
a reference (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Security/Guidelines). These
|
||||
For more detailed guidance, please see the OpenStack Security Guidelines as a
|
||||
reference (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Security/Guidelines). These
|
||||
guidelines are a work in progress and are designed to help you identify
|
||||
security best practices. For further information, feel free to reach out
|
||||
to the OpenStack Security Group at openstack-security@lists.openstack.org.
|
||||
security best practices. For further information, feel free to reach out to the
|
||||
OpenStack Security Group at openstack-security@lists.openstack.org.
|
||||
|
||||
Other end user impact
|
||||
=====================
|
||||
@ -183,9 +188,9 @@ feature?
|
||||
Performance Impact
|
||||
==================
|
||||
|
||||
Describe any potential performance impact on the system, for example
|
||||
how often will new code be called, and is there a major change to the calling
|
||||
pattern of existing code.
|
||||
Describe any potential performance impact on the system, for example how often
|
||||
will new code be called, and is there a major change to the calling pattern of
|
||||
existing code.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples of things to consider here include:
|
||||
|
||||
@ -207,12 +212,12 @@ Examples of things to consider here include:
|
||||
Other deployer impact
|
||||
=====================
|
||||
|
||||
Discuss things that will affect how you deploy and configure OpenStack
|
||||
that have not already been mentioned, such as:
|
||||
Discuss things that will affect how you deploy and configure OpenStack that
|
||||
have not already been mentioned, such as:
|
||||
|
||||
* What config options are being added? Should they be more generic than
|
||||
proposed? Are the default values ones which will work well in
|
||||
real deployments?
|
||||
proposed? Are the default values ones which will work well in real
|
||||
deployments?
|
||||
|
||||
* Is this a change that takes immediate effect after its merged, or is it
|
||||
something that has to be explicitly enabled?
|
||||
@ -221,7 +226,7 @@ that have not already been mentioned, such as:
|
||||
|
||||
* Please state anything that those those upgrading from the previous release,
|
||||
need to be aware of. Also describe any plans to deprecate configuration
|
||||
values or features. Consider the potential implications of automated
|
||||
values or features. Consider the potential implications of automated
|
||||
deployment technologies.
|
||||
|
||||
Developer impact
|
||||
@ -234,12 +239,12 @@ Upgrade impact
|
||||
|
||||
Describe any potential upgrade impact on the system, such as:
|
||||
|
||||
* StarlingX supports N-1 version for rolling upgrades. Does
|
||||
the proposed change need to consider older code running that may impact how
|
||||
the new change functions, for example, by changing or overwriting global
|
||||
state in the database? This is generally most problematic when making changes
|
||||
that involve multiple compute hosts, like move operations such as migrate,
|
||||
resize, unshelve and evacuate.
|
||||
* StarlingX supports N-1 version for rolling upgrades. Does the proposed change
|
||||
need to consider older code running that may impact how the new change
|
||||
functions, for example, by changing or overwriting global state in the
|
||||
database? This is generally most problematic when making changes that involve
|
||||
multiple compute hosts, like move operations such as migrate, resize,
|
||||
unshelve and evacuate.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
@ -276,8 +281,8 @@ but we're mostly trying to understand the timeline for implementation.
|
||||
Dependencies
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
* Include specific references to specs in StarlingX, or in other
|
||||
projects, that this one either depends on or is related to.
|
||||
* Include specific references to specs in StarlingX, or in other projects, that
|
||||
this one either depends on or is related to.
|
||||
|
||||
* If this requires functionality of another project that is not currently used
|
||||
by StarlingX document that fact.
|
||||
@ -289,16 +294,16 @@ Dependencies
|
||||
Testing
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Please discuss the important scenarios needed to test here, as well as
|
||||
specific edge cases we should be ensuring work correctly. For each
|
||||
scenario please specify if this requires specialized hardware, a full
|
||||
openstack environment, or can be simulated inside the project tree.
|
||||
Please discuss the important scenarios needed to test here, as well as specific
|
||||
edge cases we should be ensuring work correctly. For each scenario please
|
||||
specify if this requires specialized hardware, a full openstack environment, or
|
||||
can be simulated inside the project tree.
|
||||
|
||||
Please discuss how the change will be tested. We especially want to know what
|
||||
tempest tests will be added. It is assumed that unit test coverage will be
|
||||
added so that doesn't need to be mentioned explicitly, but discussion of why
|
||||
you think unit tests are sufficient and we don't need to add more
|
||||
tests would need to be included.
|
||||
you think unit tests are sufficient and we don't need to add more tests would
|
||||
need to be included.
|
||||
|
||||
Is this untestable in gate given current limitations (specific hardware /
|
||||
software configurations available)? If so, are there mitigation plans (3rd
|
||||
@ -309,12 +314,12 @@ Documentation Impact
|
||||
====================
|
||||
|
||||
Which audiences are affected most by this change, and which documentation
|
||||
titles for StarlingX should be updated because of this change? Don't
|
||||
repeat details discussed above, but reference them here in the context of
|
||||
titles for StarlingX should be updated because of this change? Don't repeat
|
||||
details discussed above, but reference them here in the context of
|
||||
documentation for multiple audiences. For example, the End User Guide would
|
||||
need to be updated if the change offers a new feature available through the
|
||||
CLI or dashboard. If a config option changes or is deprecated, note here that
|
||||
the documentation needs to be updated to reflect this specification's change.
|
||||
need to be updated if the change offers a new feature available through the CLI
|
||||
or dashboard. If a config option changes or is deprecated, note here that the
|
||||
documentation needs to be updated to reflect this specification's change.
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
@ -329,7 +334,7 @@ references are unavailable. Examples of what you could include are:
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to relevant research, if appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
* Related specifications as appropriate (e.g. if it's an EC2 thing, link the
|
||||
* Related specifications as appropriate (e.g. if it's an EC2 thing, link the
|
||||
EC2 docs)
|
||||
|
||||
* Anything else you feel it is worthwhile to refer to
|
||||
@ -349,4 +354,3 @@ what's happened along the time.
|
||||
- Description
|
||||
* - Stein
|
||||
- Introduced
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user