Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Blueprints"

(Blueprint Review Criteria)
(See also)
 
(27 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Launchpad blueprints are used to track the implementation of significant features in OpenStack. Keeping their status current is critical to the success of the release and the project as a whole. It avoids unnecessary reporting, pings and discussions, and keeps everyone on the same page.  
 
Launchpad blueprints are used to track the implementation of significant features in OpenStack. Keeping their status current is critical to the success of the release and the project as a whole. It avoids unnecessary reporting, pings and discussions, and keeps everyone on the same page.  
  
= Blueprints lifecycle =
+
= Blueprints and Specs =
  
Blueprints offer a forum for listing and planning specifications for work to be done. Whereas one could think of these as bugs with a "Feature Request" priority, there is actually a more fundamental difference. A bug is a description of a problem, and a blueprint is a description of a solution. It would be perfectly legitimate, given the scope of a particular problem, to file a bug on a problem and then to write up a blueprint describing the approach to solving the problem. For most bugs this would be a rather large waste of time, but is merely pointed out to underscore the difference in purpose.
+
In addition to tracking implementation status, blueprints can also be used to propose a design and get it approved. Specifically, you can link to an external page that contains your specification, and use the "Design" fields in the blueprint to track the spec approval. However, Launchpad is missing a lot of features that would make iterating on spec design and approval usable, like ability to discuss or iterate on several revisions of a spec, or record multiple approvals.
  
The Blueprint system itself is quite simple, and the only thing required to create a blueprint is a title and a description of the blueprint. It is expected that longer-form official writeups of the approach would go on a wiki page, and accordingly the blueprint has a field for specifying where the writeup can be found. The intent here is that if you write a proper description of the work in the wiki, then once you are done with it you will be left with some form of documentation describing a particular feature.
+
In order to solve that issue, starting with the Juno cycle, some projects decided to experiment with using a specific git repository (*-specs) to propose, discuss, iterate and track approvals on specifications using Gerrit instead of Launchpad. Those projects still ultimately use Launchpad once the spec is approved, to track the implementation status of the approved feature.
  
Blueprints, like bugs, can be targeted towards different milestones, so that at any point it's simple to see what the status of intended work is.
+
That results in two slightly different workflows, depending on whether the targeted project uses a -specs repository or not.
  
Here are the different steps in a blueprint's life:
+
== Spec + Blueprints lifecycle ==
  
=== Creation ===
+
For projects using a -specs repository (like Nova, Neutron, Oslo, Ceilometer...), you should follow this process:
  
If you intend to work on a given feature, you should create a blueprint for that. Adding a blueprint is simply a matter of going to the project's blueprints page, such as [1] and clicking on "Register a Blueprint". Describe the feature summarily in the blueprint itself, and link to another document (using the specification link) if you have more.
+
* Register your blueprint in Launchpad by going to the project page at launchpad.net/$PROJECT and clicking "Register a blueprint"
 +
* Upload a design specification in the "specs/<release>" folder in $PROJECT-specs
 +
** e.g. http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/nova-specs/tree/specs/juno/name-of-your-blueprint-in-launchpad
 +
** it should be based on the specs/template.rst, see the instructions in the template for more details
 +
** get it reviewed by submitting your patch using Gerrit, in the usual way: [http://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/developers.html#development-workflow Development Workflow]
 +
** at the end of each release, non-completed specs will be removed
 +
** you need to re-submit for the following release, should the blueprint slip
 +
* Project drivers will approve blueprint by:
 +
** Setting priority
 +
** Setting a target milestone, based on the assignee proposal
 +
* Assignee then keeps milestone and implementation status current to reflect progress
 +
* Assignee sets implementation status to "Implemented" when the work is completed
  
Note that you may optionally track the peer-review of your blueprint using the ''Drafter'' and ''Definition'' fields.
 
  
'''Once it is ready for PTL review, you should set:'''
+
NB: an automated script will ensure that no milestone target is set on unapproved (unprioritized) blueprints.
  
* Milestone: Which part of the release cycle you think your work will be proposed for merging.
+
== Blueprints only lifecycle ==
  
 +
Projects not using a -specs repository (Horizon, Trove...), you should follow this process:
  
For more information on the criteria used to review a blueprint, please see [[Blueprints#Blueprint_Review_Criteria]].  If your blueprint needs additional information, it will be put in the '''Review''' state. If approved, it will be marked as '''Approved''' and given a priority (initially Low).
+
* Register your blueprint in Launchpad by going to the project page at launchpad.net/$PROJECT and clicking "Register a blueprint"
 
+
** Describe the feature summarily in the blueprint itself
Note that simply targeting a blueprint to a milestone is sufficient to get the blueprint in the queue to be reviewed.  There is no need to email the mailing list or the PTL, or ping anyone on IRC.
+
** Link to another document (using the specification link) if you have more
 
+
** Set yourself as assignee
Note that larger projects, such as Nova, have a team of people led by the PTL that is responsible for reviewing blueprints.  In the case of Nova, that is the [https://launchpad.net/~nova-drivers/+members#active nova-drivers] team.
+
** Set target milestone to indicate when you expect the work to land
 
+
* Project drivers will approve blueprint by:
Click on ''Under development'' in [[Releases]] to access the current release cycle schedule.
+
** Setting priority
 
+
* Assignee then keeps milestone and implementation status current to reflect progress
=== Inclusion in the release roadmap (PTLs) ===
+
* Assignee sets implementation status to "Implemented" when the work is completed
 
 
The PTL, possibly with the help of a blueprint review team, triages the blueprint by setting a priority:
 
 
 
* Priority: <blueprint priority> (see below)
 
 
 
 
 
They may also unset the target milestone and set the Definition to ''Obsolete'' (together with an explanation in the whiteboard) if the blueprint is a wrong idea altogether.
 
 
 
=== During development (assignee) ===
 
 
 
The "Implementation" field should reflect progress in your work:
 
 
 
* Implementation: <degree of completion> (see below)
 
 
 
 
 
Please update the implementation status regularly to avoid being pinged about it :)
 
 
 
=== When merged (assignee) ===
 
 
 
When the work is fully merged, finalize the spec by setting:
 
 
 
* Implementation: ''Implemented''
 
  
  
Line 83: Line 72:
 
|}
 
|}
  
 
'''''Nova note:''''' Note that the Nova project has some additional rules around priority setting.  All blueprints start out as a low priority.  To get a higher priority, two core reviewers must sponsor a blueprint, agreeing that they will help review the resulting code to get it merged.  At that point, the blueprint review team can consider raising the priority to be above Low.  This is to set more realistic expectations about what blueprints we expect to get merged in a given part of the release cycle because it heavily depends on reviewer interest and availability.
 
  
 
==== Definition ====
 
==== Definition ====
You can optionally use this field during the planning phase. We also use it to mark a blueprint ''Superseded'' or ''Obsolete''.
+
You can optionally use this field during the planning/approval phase. We also use it to mark a blueprint ''Superseded'' or ''Obsolete''.
  
 
==== Implementation ====
 
==== Implementation ====
Line 152: Line 139:
  
 
==== Milestone target ====
 
==== Milestone target ====
The milestone the blueprint should be completed by. This is mandatory.
+
The milestone the blueprint should be completed by. Use of this field depends on the workflow followed (see above). In a spec-driven workflow, it's initially set by drivers at approval time. In a pure blueprint workflow, it's initially set by the assignee to communicate when the work is expected to land. In both cases, it's maintained by the assignee to communicate when the work is expected to land.
  
 
==== Related branches ====
 
==== Related branches ====
Line 172: Line 159:
 
Dependencies between blueprints. If one blueprint needs to be delivered before this one, this needs to be recorded here. Note that if B depends on A being completed, the priority of A should be as high (or higher) as the priority of B.
 
Dependencies between blueprints. If one blueprint needs to be delivered before this one, this needs to be recorded here. Note that if B depends on A being completed, the priority of A should be as high (or higher) as the priority of B.
  
 
= Blueprint Review Criteria =
 
 
Once a blueprint has been targeted to a release milestone, it will be reviewed. Here is some criteria used when reviewing the blueprints.
 
 
A blueprint ...
 
 
* is assigned to the person signing up to do the work
 
* has been targeted to the milestone when the code is planned to be completed
 
* is an appropriate feature for the project.  This means it fits with the vision for the project overall.  This is obviously very subjective, but the result should represent consensus.
 
* includes enough detail to be able to complete an initial design review before approving the blueprint. In many cases, the design review may result in a discussion on the mailing list to work through details. A link to this discussion should be left in the whiteboard of the blueprint for reference.  This initial design review should be completed before the blueprint is approved.
 
* includes information that describes the user impact (or lack of). Between the blueprint and text that comes with the [http://justwriteclick.com/2013/09/17/openstack-docimpact-flag-walk-through/ DocImpact flag] in commits, the docs team should have ''everything'' they need to thoroughly document the feature.
 
* has a scope that is not open ended.  The scope of the blueprint must be clear and well defined such that it is easy to tell when to mark the blueprint as implemented.
 
 
 
Some blueprints are closed as unnecessary.  Blueprints are used for tracking significant development efforts.  In general, small and/or straight forward cleanups do not need blueprints.  A blueprint should be filed if:
 
 
* it impacts the release notes (would a user care?)
 
** A feature has been added, removed, or changed ... For example, changes to:
 
*** configuration options
 
*** glance or cinder metadata properties that Nova consumes
 
*** public APIs
 
** Affects deployments or upgrades ... For example, changes to:
 
*** how you migrate the DB schema
 
*** services that must be running
 
*** other upgrade procedures
 
* it covers significant internal development  or refactoring efforts
 
 
 
Once the review has been complete, the blueprint should be marked as approved and the priority should be set.  A set priority is how we know from the blueprint list which ones have already been reviewed.
 
  
 
= See also =
 
= See also =
* [[ReleaseCycle]]
+
* http://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide
 
* [[Bugs]]
 
* [[Bugs]]
 +
* https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack - the blueprints site
 +
 +
[[Category:Contribute]]

Latest revision as of 15:38, 13 June 2016

Launchpad blueprints are used to track the implementation of significant features in OpenStack. Keeping their status current is critical to the success of the release and the project as a whole. It avoids unnecessary reporting, pings and discussions, and keeps everyone on the same page.

Blueprints and Specs

In addition to tracking implementation status, blueprints can also be used to propose a design and get it approved. Specifically, you can link to an external page that contains your specification, and use the "Design" fields in the blueprint to track the spec approval. However, Launchpad is missing a lot of features that would make iterating on spec design and approval usable, like ability to discuss or iterate on several revisions of a spec, or record multiple approvals.

In order to solve that issue, starting with the Juno cycle, some projects decided to experiment with using a specific git repository (*-specs) to propose, discuss, iterate and track approvals on specifications using Gerrit instead of Launchpad. Those projects still ultimately use Launchpad once the spec is approved, to track the implementation status of the approved feature.

That results in two slightly different workflows, depending on whether the targeted project uses a -specs repository or not.

Spec + Blueprints lifecycle

For projects using a -specs repository (like Nova, Neutron, Oslo, Ceilometer...), you should follow this process:

  • Register your blueprint in Launchpad by going to the project page at launchpad.net/$PROJECT and clicking "Register a blueprint"
  • Upload a design specification in the "specs/<release>" folder in $PROJECT-specs
  • Project drivers will approve blueprint by:
    • Setting priority
    • Setting a target milestone, based on the assignee proposal
  • Assignee then keeps milestone and implementation status current to reflect progress
  • Assignee sets implementation status to "Implemented" when the work is completed


NB: an automated script will ensure that no milestone target is set on unapproved (unprioritized) blueprints.

Blueprints only lifecycle

Projects not using a -specs repository (Horizon, Trove...), you should follow this process:

  • Register your blueprint in Launchpad by going to the project page at launchpad.net/$PROJECT and clicking "Register a blueprint"
    • Describe the feature summarily in the blueprint itself
    • Link to another document (using the specification link) if you have more
    • Set yourself as assignee
    • Set target milestone to indicate when you expect the work to land
  • Project drivers will approve blueprint by:
    • Setting priority
  • Assignee then keeps milestone and implementation status current to reflect progress
  • Assignee sets implementation status to "Implemented" when the work is completed


Blueprints reference

Here are the different fields available in Launchpad blueprints, and how we use them within the OpenStack project.

Specification link

URL to an additional document, potentially describing the design and implementation details.

Priority

PTLs and their blueprint review teams use priority to communicate how important a given feature is to the success of the next release.

Essential Would prefer not to release without that feature
High Important feature that we should definitely have in the release
Medium Optional feature that should still be part of the roadmap
Low Optional feature that may make it, but we should *not* follow on the release radar
Undefined Blueprint has not been triaged yet


Definition

You can optionally use this field during the planning/approval phase. We also use it to mark a blueprint Superseded or Obsolete.

Implementation

Use this status to indicate the degree of completion of your blueprint. This is mandatory.

Unknown Implementation status was not set yet! Fix it!
Not started Implementation is 0%
Started Implementation is > 0%
Blocked Implementation is blocked, see whiteboard for details, shall be discussed at next release meeting
Slow progress Implementation is not blocked, but might miss the target milestone
Good progress Implementation is on track to be delivered at the targeted milestone
Beta available Implementation is almost complete, code is available in a branch or a draft review now
Needs code review All changes were proposed in review
Implemented All changes were merged


Extra statuses (you should probably not use them):

Informational No code changes needed. Maybe that didn't need a blueprint in the first place.
Deferred Blueprint was deferred to a future release. You should probably use the future series next milestone instead.
Needs infrastructure (not used)
Deployment (not used)

Series goal

The release series (Essex, Folsom...) for the proposed change. This should always match the target milestone. An automated script will ensure that the two fields match, it runs roughly every 2 hours.

Approver

The PTL for the project (optional).

Drafter

The person responsible for the planning phase on this blueprint (optional).

Assignee

The person responsible for implementing the blueprint. This is mandatory.

Milestone target

The milestone the blueprint should be completed by. Use of this field depends on the workflow followed (see above). In a spec-driven workflow, it's initially set by drivers at approval time. In a pure blueprint workflow, it's initially set by the assignee to communicate when the work is expected to land. In both cases, it's maintained by the assignee to communicate when the work is expected to land.

Related branches

Not used.

Related bugs

Bugs related to this blueprint, if any.

Sprints

Not used.

Feedback requests

Not used.

Whiteboard

Free-form notes. If the blueprint implementation is blocked, this should state the reason why. Gerrit will add notes about corresponding reviews in this field.

Dependency tree

Dependencies between blueprints. If one blueprint needs to be delivered before this one, this needs to be recorded here. Note that if B depends on A being completed, the priority of A should be as high (or higher) as the priority of B.


See also