Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Trove/MeetingAgendaHistory"

(→‎Agenda for Apr. 21)
(→‎Trove Weekly Meeting Agenda History)
Line 72: Line 72:
 
* Open Items  
 
* Open Items  
 
** Clarification on commit message style guidelines (slicknik): We've been having a lot of -1 reviews on commit message style and I wanted to clarify some of this so that we can reduce review churn caused by this. Goal: Have a clear understanding on when a commit message should be -1'ed.   
 
** Clarification on commit message style guidelines (slicknik): We've been having a lot of -1 reviews on commit message style and I wanted to clarify some of this so that we can reduce review churn caused by this. Goal: Have a clear understanding on when a commit message should be -1'ed.   
 +
 +
== Agenda for May 7  ==
 +
 +
* How do Gerrit changes get approved? [mat-lowery]
 +
** Goal: To clarify the Gerrit change approval process used by Trove core (for the benefit of core and non-core).
 +
*** Core potentially benefits by establishing a process that all core follows (and possibly swap best practices).
 +
**** What if all core used a prioritized queue such as [http://status.openstack.org/reviews/ ReviewDay]? If you're not using a prioritized queue, how do you prevent starvation?
 +
*** Non-core potentially benefits by making the process transparent and setting expectations.
 +
**** "Hey core, please review <change>" is '''inefficient and unfair'''. The priority (such as that calculated by ReviewDay) should be the sole indicator of review/approval priority.
 +
** Goal: To reduce the time from submittal to approval and prevent Gerrit change starvation.
 +
*** My first-ever Trove [https://review.openstack.org/#/c/68015/ submittal] is nearly three months old. Why is that?
 +
*** Establish Gerrit "etiquette."
 +
**** No leaving -1s and then disappearing. A reviewer that leaves a -1 has an obligation to respond to follow up questions.
 +
**** No leaving -1s for nice-to-haves. That's what 0 is for.
 +
**** No leaving -1s for questions about why something was done. Again, use a 0.
 +
**** No leaving -1s for something minor when there are five +1s.
 +
**** Leaving a -1 has the potential to cause the author to "reset the counter" (because he has to submit a new revision) on age-influenced priorities (such as ReviewDay). Think hard before you leave that -1.
 +
** More details on the [http://openstack-dev.markmail.org/search/?q=transparent#query:transparent+page:1+mid:76drvzxqepe7547y+state:results mailing list].
 +
* Meetings cancelled next week since most folks will be at the ATL summit [slicknik]
  
 
<br />
 
<br />
Line 79: Line 98:
 
<br /><br />
 
<br /><br />
 
<big>Note: BP Meetings now have their own wiki page at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TroveBPMeeting</big>
 
<big>Note: BP Meetings now have their own wiki page at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TroveBPMeeting</big>
−
 
  
 
= Trove Blueprint Meeting Agenda History =
 
= Trove Blueprint Meeting Agenda History =

Revision as of 22:26, 9 May 2014

Trove Weekly Meeting Agenda History

Agenda for Mar. 19

Agenda for Mar. 26

Agenda for Apr. 2

  • Icehouse RC1 cut and Juno branch open
  • ATL Dev Summit topics
  • Open discussion

Agenda for Apr. 9

Agenda for Apr. 16

Agenda for Apr. 23

  • Juno Mid-cycle Meetup - discuss venue/timing proposal and confirm

Agenda for Apr. 30

  • Establish policy for disk image builder elements for datastores [mat-lowery]
    • Do we require elements for both Ubuntu and Fedora when a Gerrit change introduces a new datastore or version?
      • Cassandra and Couchbase are examples of datastores that don't currently have Fedora elements. https://review.openstack.org/77461 and https://review.openstack.org/79413 are examples of Gerrit changes that have been -1ed because of lack of Fedora elements.
      • Isn't one working element better than none? If both are required, is that inviting lower quality on the other element the user is required to code but never uses?
      • Are Fedora elements tested in an automated way as the Ubuntu elements are? Reasoning: Yes they were submitted with the Gerrit change, but do they work?
      • Is the policy that Trove requires both Fedora and Ubuntu support for each manager on day one? There is already a lack of parity across datastore managers--not all can do backup and restore (but ultimately I assume they will). Why can't Trove take distro support piecemeal just like it does the datastore operations?
      • mat-lowery (talk) Wed Apr 30 19:17:28 UTC 2014
        • Result: <SlickNik> Let's table this for now.
    • What about Package Install vs. Tarball Install vs. Source Install? Is there a requirement on how the bits are laid down?
      • If packages are required, what are the acceptable sources? (Example: Redis currently uses a PPA.)
      • Does the decision here have repercussions on datastore upgrades?
      • mat-lowery (talk) Wed Apr 30 19:17:28 UTC 2014
        • Result: <SlickNik> So allow [PPAs]. But let's make a best effort to follow this order: distro package, project maintainer PPA, some random PPA.
  • Open Items
    • Clarification on commit message style guidelines (slicknik): We've been having a lot of -1 reviews on commit message style and I wanted to clarify some of this so that we can reduce review churn caused by this. Goal: Have a clear understanding on when a commit message should be -1'ed.

Agenda for May 7

  • How do Gerrit changes get approved? [mat-lowery]
    • Goal: To clarify the Gerrit change approval process used by Trove core (for the benefit of core and non-core).
      • Core potentially benefits by establishing a process that all core follows (and possibly swap best practices).
        • What if all core used a prioritized queue such as ReviewDay? If you're not using a prioritized queue, how do you prevent starvation?
      • Non-core potentially benefits by making the process transparent and setting expectations.
        • "Hey core, please review <change>" is inefficient and unfair. The priority (such as that calculated by ReviewDay) should be the sole indicator of review/approval priority.
    • Goal: To reduce the time from submittal to approval and prevent Gerrit change starvation.
      • My first-ever Trove submittal is nearly three months old. Why is that?
      • Establish Gerrit "etiquette."
        • No leaving -1s and then disappearing. A reviewer that leaves a -1 has an obligation to respond to follow up questions.
        • No leaving -1s for nice-to-haves. That's what 0 is for.
        • No leaving -1s for questions about why something was done. Again, use a 0.
        • No leaving -1s for something minor when there are five +1s.
        • Leaving a -1 has the potential to cause the author to "reset the counter" (because he has to submit a new revision) on age-influenced priorities (such as ReviewDay). Think hard before you leave that -1.
    • More details on the mailing list.
  • Meetings cancelled next week since most folks will be at the ATL summit [slicknik]


Meeting Chat Logs: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/trove/2014/
Meeting Agenda History: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Trove/MeetingAgendaHistory#Trove_Weekly_Meeting_Agenda_History

Note: BP Meetings now have their own wiki page at: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TroveBPMeeting

Trove Blueprint Meeting Agenda History

For those interested, we have blueprint meetings in #openstack-trove weekly, Mondays at 18:00 UTC. Feel free to add items in the agenda below.

Agenda for Mar. 31

Networking related blueprints:

Others:

Agenda for Apr. 7

Agenda for Apr. 14

Agenda for Apr. 21

Agenda for April 28


Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Trove/MeetingAgendaHistory&oldid=51958"