And now, the architects vs. developers discussion :) I hear both sides of the argument, and I think both have very valid points.
However, so far we have been following the "architect" way (design upfront and separately from code), and it's failing miserably. I'm a bit tired to see developers spending all their time trying to catch up with a spec they had little influence on. I regret that some key features in a release end up being exposed in some strange extension. Most of all, I feel sorry for not having any release fully compliant with an API that is under our control. So I'm more than ready to give the "developers" way its chance. Especially with safeguards like an API freeze and inclusion of architects in the review process when API is touched. I think we can mitigate the risk of anarchistic design, and actually end up with code that matches API. Regards, -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) Release Manager, OpenStack _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
