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:
parent
415b3486f5
commit
f7c04656d8
@ -1,40 +1,34 @@
|
|||||||
StarlingX Specs
|
.. stx-specs documentation master file
|
||||||
===============
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. toctree::
|
=================================
|
||||||
:glob:
|
OpenStack StarlingX Project Plans
|
||||||
:maxdepth: 2
|
=================================
|
||||||
:caption: Contents:
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
StarlingX Project Specifications
|
Specifications
|
||||||
--------------------------------
|
==============
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Here you can find the specs, and spec template, for each release:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. toctree::
|
.. toctree::
|
||||||
:glob:
|
:glob:
|
||||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
specs/*
|
specs/2019.03/index
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Approved Specifications
|
Process
|
||||||
-----------------------
|
=======
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Documentation for stx-specs process:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. toctree::
|
.. toctree::
|
||||||
:glob:
|
|
||||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
:maxdepth: 1
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
specs/approved/*
|
How to submit a spec <specs/instructions>
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Implemented Specifications
|
For more details, look at spec template for the specific release, and see the
|
||||||
--------------------------
|
wiki page on Blueprints: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
.. toctree::
|
|
||||||
:glob:
|
|
||||||
:maxdepth: 1
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
specs/implemented/*
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Indices and tables
|
Indices and tables
|
||||||
==================
|
==================
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
* :ref:`genindex`
|
|
||||||
* :ref:`search`
|
* :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
|
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.
|
- Attempt to detail each applicable section.
|
||||||
- If a section does not apply, use N/A, and optionally provide
|
- If a section does not apply, use N/A, and optionally provide
|
||||||
a short explanation.
|
a short explanation.
|
||||||
- New specs for review should be placed in the ``approved`` subfolder, where
|
- New specs for review should be placed in the ``approved`` subfolder for the
|
||||||
they will undergo review and approval in Gerrit_.
|
applicable release, where they will undergo review and approval in Gerrit_.
|
||||||
- Specs that have finished implementation should be moved to the
|
- Specs that have finished implementation should be moved to the
|
||||||
``implemented`` subfolder.
|
``implemented`` subfolder for the applicable release.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Indexing and Categorization
|
Indexing and Categorization
|
||||||
---------------------------
|
---------------------------
|
||||||
|
Loading…
x
Reference in New Issue
Block a user