cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Burwell <jburw...@basho.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Do we need code review process for code changes related to storage subsystem?
Date Fri, 21 Jun 2013 04:42:47 GMT
Prasanna,


I believe the problem Edison is trying to address is high churn and
rework incurred by long review cycles.  I find it hard to review
interfaces in isolation without implementations depicting actual
usage.  I would also like to see process ceremony kept to minimum to
reduce drag on the over project flow.  To that end, I think the best
approach is to divide large enhancements into a batch of smaller
commits that can be reviewed throughout the release cycle. I think
this approach will reduce churn and rework while maintaing high impact
reviews.

Thanks,
-John

On Jun 21, 2013, at 12:31 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <tsp@apache.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 08:41:56PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 05:59:01PM +0000, Edison Su wrote:
>>> For interface/API changes, we'd better have a code review, as more
>>> storage vendors and more developers outside Citrix are
>>> contributing code to CloudStack storage subsystem. The code change
>>> should have less surprise for everybody who cares about storage
>>> subsystem.
>>
>> I'm not following what you are saying Edison.  What are we not doing in
>> this regard right now?  I'm also not getting the "Citrix" point of
>> reference here.
>
> May be that everything interface related goes through
> review/discussion when touching the storage subsys? I don't mind that
> for other base components as well. But probably a good idea for
> storage since it's still nascent and evolving.
>
> --
> Prasanna.,
>
> ------------------------
> Powered by BigRock.com
>

Mime
View raw message