Add per-release subdirectories to avoid confusion
Eventually we'll have multiple releases, so let's create per-release subdirectories such that we can track which specs were approved/implemented in each release. Change-Id: Iadbd4a73701d01a5c88ab5414e2b607eab779357
This commit is contained in:
Chris Friesen
parent
415b3486f5
commit
f7c04656d8
@ -1,40 +1,34 @@
|
||||
StarlingX Specs
|
||||
===============
|
||||
.. stx-specs documentation master file
|
||||
|
||||
=================================
|
||||
OpenStack StarlingX Project Plans
|
||||
=================================
|
||||
|
||||
Specifications
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Here you can find the specs, and spec template, for each release:
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 2
|
||||
:caption: Contents:
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
StarlingX Project Specifications
|
||||
--------------------------------
|
||||
specs/2019.03/index
|
||||
|
||||
Process
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Documentation for stx-specs process:
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
specs/*
|
||||
How to submit a spec <specs/instructions>
|
||||
|
||||
Approved Specifications
|
||||
-----------------------
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
specs/approved/*
|
||||
|
||||
Implemented Specifications
|
||||
--------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
specs/implemented/*
|
||||
For more details, look at spec template for the specific release, and see the
|
||||
wiki page on Blueprints: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints
|
||||
|
||||
Indices and tables
|
||||
==================
|
||||
|
||||
* :ref:`genindex`
|
||||
* :ref:`search`
|
||||
|
||||
@ -1 +0,0 @@
|
||||
../../specs
|
||||
1
doc/source/specs/2019.03/approved
Symbolic link
1
doc/source/specs/2019.03/approved
Symbolic link
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
../../../../specs/2019.03/approved
|
||||
1
doc/source/specs/2019.03/implemented
Symbolic link
1
doc/source/specs/2019.03/implemented
Symbolic link
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
../../../../specs/2019.03/implemented
|
||||
27
doc/source/specs/2019.03/index.rst
Normal file
27
doc/source/specs/2019.03/index.rst
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
|
||||
StarlingX 2019.03 Specs
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
|
||||
Template:
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
Specification Template (2019.03 release) <template>
|
||||
|
||||
Approved Specifications
|
||||
-----------------------
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
approved/*
|
||||
|
||||
Implemented Specifications
|
||||
--------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
.. toctree::
|
||||
:glob:
|
||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||
|
||||
implemented/*
|
||||
1
doc/source/specs/2019.03/template.rst
Symbolic link
1
doc/source/specs/2019.03/template.rst
Symbolic link
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
../../../../specs/2019.03/approved/STX_Example_Spec.rst
|
||||
1
doc/source/specs/instructions.rst
Symbolic link
1
doc/source/specs/instructions.rst
Symbolic link
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
../../../specs/instructions.rst
|
||||
352
specs/2019.03/approved/STX_Example_Spec.rst
Normal file
352
specs/2019.03/approved/STX_Example_Spec.rst
Normal file
@ -0,0 +1,352 @@
|
||||
.. 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.
|
||||
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
* 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.
|
||||
|
||||
* 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:
|
||||
|
||||
* Your spec should be in ReSTructured text, like 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)
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
|
||||
* To test out your formatting, build the docs using tox and see the generated
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
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
|
||||
|
||||
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?
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
Here is where you cover the change you propose to make in detail. How do you
|
||||
propose to solve this problem?
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
Questions which need to be addressed by this section should include:
|
||||
|
||||
* What new data objects and/or database schema changes is this going to
|
||||
require?
|
||||
|
||||
* What database migrations will accompany this change.
|
||||
|
||||
* How will the initial set of new data objects be generated.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
|
||||
* 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).
|
||||
|
||||
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
|
||||
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 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.
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
Other end user impact
|
||||
=====================
|
||||
|
||||
Aside from the API, are there other ways a user will interact with this
|
||||
feature?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change have an impact on python-client? What does the user
|
||||
interface there look like?
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples of things to consider here include:
|
||||
|
||||
* A periodic task might look like a small addition but if it calls conductor or
|
||||
another service the load is multiplied by the number of nodes in the system.
|
||||
|
||||
* Any impacts to the deployment performance
|
||||
|
||||
* A small change in a utility function or a commonly used decorator can have a
|
||||
large impacts on performance.
|
||||
|
||||
* Calls which result in a database queries (whether direct or via conductor)
|
||||
can have a profound impact on performance when called in critical sections of
|
||||
the code.
|
||||
|
||||
* Will the change include any locking, and if so what considerations are there
|
||||
on holding the lock?
|
||||
|
||||
Other deployer impact
|
||||
=====================
|
||||
|
||||
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?
|
||||
|
||||
* Is this a change that takes immediate effect after its merged, or is it
|
||||
something that has to be explicitly enabled?
|
||||
|
||||
* If this change is a new binary, how would it be deployed?
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
deployment technologies.
|
||||
|
||||
Developer impact
|
||||
=================
|
||||
|
||||
Discuss things that will affect other developers working on StarlingX.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
===========
|
||||
|
||||
Who is leading the writing of the code? Or is this a blueprint where you're
|
||||
throwing it out there to see who picks it up?
|
||||
|
||||
If more than one person is working on the implementation, please designate the
|
||||
primary author and contact.
|
||||
|
||||
Primary assignee:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Other contributors:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Repos Impacted
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
List repositories in StarlingX that are impacted by this spec.
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
===========
|
||||
|
||||
Work items or tasks -- break the feature up into the things that need to be
|
||||
done to implement it. Those parts might end up being done by different people,
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
* If this requires functionality of another project that is not currently used
|
||||
by StarlingX document that fact.
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this feature require any new library dependencies or code otherwise not
|
||||
included in OpenStack? Or does it depend on a specific version of library?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
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 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.
|
||||
|
||||
Is this untestable in gate given current limitations (specific hardware /
|
||||
software configurations available)? If so, are there mitigation plans (3rd
|
||||
party testing, gate enhancements, etc).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
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
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Please add any useful references here. You are not required to have any
|
||||
reference. Moreover, this specification should still make sense when your
|
||||
references are unavailable. Examples of what you could include are:
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to mailing list or IRC discussions
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to notes from a summit session
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to relevant research, if appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
History
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Optional section intended to be used each time the spec is updated to describe
|
||||
new design, API or any database schema updated. Useful to let reader understand
|
||||
what's happened along the time.
|
||||
|
||||
.. list-table:: Revisions
|
||||
:header-rows: 1
|
||||
|
||||
* - Release Name
|
||||
- Description
|
||||
* - Stein
|
||||
- Introduced
|
||||
|
||||
@ -1,352 +0,0 @@
|
||||
.. 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.
|
||||
|
||||
=======================
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
* 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.
|
||||
|
||||
* 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:
|
||||
|
||||
* Your spec should be in ReSTructured text, like 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)
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
|
||||
* To test out your formatting, build the docs using tox and see the generated
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
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
|
||||
|
||||
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?
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
Proposed change
|
||||
===============
|
||||
|
||||
Here is where you cover the change you propose to make in detail. How do you
|
||||
propose to solve this problem?
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
Questions which need to be addressed by this section should include:
|
||||
|
||||
* What new data objects and/or database schema changes is this going to
|
||||
require?
|
||||
|
||||
* What database migrations will accompany this change.
|
||||
|
||||
* How will the initial set of new data objects be generated.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
|
||||
* 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).
|
||||
|
||||
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
|
||||
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 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.
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
Other end user impact
|
||||
=====================
|
||||
|
||||
Aside from the API, are there other ways a user will interact with this
|
||||
feature?
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this change have an impact on python-client? What does the user
|
||||
interface there look like?
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
Examples of things to consider here include:
|
||||
|
||||
* A periodic task might look like a small addition but if it calls conductor or
|
||||
another service the load is multiplied by the number of nodes in the system.
|
||||
|
||||
* Any impacts to the deployment performance
|
||||
|
||||
* A small change in a utility function or a commonly used decorator can have a
|
||||
large impacts on performance.
|
||||
|
||||
* Calls which result in a database queries (whether direct or via conductor)
|
||||
can have a profound impact on performance when called in critical sections of
|
||||
the code.
|
||||
|
||||
* Will the change include any locking, and if so what considerations are there
|
||||
on holding the lock?
|
||||
|
||||
Other deployer impact
|
||||
=====================
|
||||
|
||||
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?
|
||||
|
||||
* Is this a change that takes immediate effect after its merged, or is it
|
||||
something that has to be explicitly enabled?
|
||||
|
||||
* If this change is a new binary, how would it be deployed?
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
deployment technologies.
|
||||
|
||||
Developer impact
|
||||
=================
|
||||
|
||||
Discuss things that will affect other developers working on StarlingX.
|
||||
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Implementation
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
Assignee(s)
|
||||
===========
|
||||
|
||||
Who is leading the writing of the code? Or is this a blueprint where you're
|
||||
throwing it out there to see who picks it up?
|
||||
|
||||
If more than one person is working on the implementation, please designate the
|
||||
primary author and contact.
|
||||
|
||||
Primary assignee:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Other contributors:
|
||||
<launchpad-id or None>
|
||||
|
||||
Repos Impacted
|
||||
==============
|
||||
|
||||
List repositories in StarlingX that are impacted by this spec.
|
||||
|
||||
Work Items
|
||||
===========
|
||||
|
||||
Work items or tasks -- break the feature up into the things that need to be
|
||||
done to implement it. Those parts might end up being done by different people,
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
* If this requires functionality of another project that is not currently used
|
||||
by StarlingX document that fact.
|
||||
|
||||
* Does this feature require any new library dependencies or code otherwise not
|
||||
included in OpenStack? Or does it depend on a specific version of library?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
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 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.
|
||||
|
||||
Is this untestable in gate given current limitations (specific hardware /
|
||||
software configurations available)? If so, are there mitigation plans (3rd
|
||||
party testing, gate enhancements, etc).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
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
|
||||
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.
|
||||
|
||||
References
|
||||
==========
|
||||
|
||||
Please add any useful references here. You are not required to have any
|
||||
reference. Moreover, this specification should still make sense when your
|
||||
references are unavailable. Examples of what you could include are:
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to mailing list or IRC discussions
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to notes from a summit session
|
||||
|
||||
* Links to relevant research, if appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
* 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
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
History
|
||||
=======
|
||||
|
||||
Optional section intended to be used each time the spec is updated to describe
|
||||
new design, API or any database schema updated. Useful to let reader understand
|
||||
what's happened along the time.
|
||||
|
||||
.. list-table:: Revisions
|
||||
:header-rows: 1
|
||||
|
||||
* - Release Name
|
||||
- Description
|
||||
* - Stein
|
||||
- Introduced
|
||||
|
||||
1
specs/STX_Example_Spec.rst
Symbolic link
1
specs/STX_Example_Spec.rst
Symbolic link
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
||||
2019.03/approved/STX_Example_Spec.rst
|
||||
@ -14,14 +14,15 @@
|
||||
Instructions
|
||||
============
|
||||
|
||||
- Use STX_Example_Spec.rst as the basis of your specification.
|
||||
- Use STX_Example_Spec.rst under the ``approved`` subfolder of the applicable
|
||||
release as the basis of your specification.
|
||||
- Attempt to detail each applicable section.
|
||||
- If a section does not apply, use N/A, and optionally provide
|
||||
a short explanation.
|
||||
- New specs for review should be placed in the ``approved`` subfolder, where
|
||||
they will undergo review and approval in Gerrit_.
|
||||
- New specs for review should be placed in the ``approved`` subfolder for the
|
||||
applicable release, where they will undergo review and approval in Gerrit_.
|
||||
- Specs that have finished implementation should be moved to the
|
||||
``implemented`` subfolder.
|
||||
``implemented`` subfolder for the applicable release.
|
||||
|
||||
Indexing and Categorization
|
||||
---------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user