From 98f490651dab336f1d79c6c72ad9063f0ac70c73 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Brian Rosmaita Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:50:03 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] Add clarification about re-proposing specs Make it clear that previously approved but unimplemented specs must be re-proposed for the current release. Change-Id: Ibe3da75827b340218ae1777615c5edb8dcec57f5 --- README.rst | 7 ++++--- doc/source/index.rst | 12 ++++++++---- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/README.rst b/README.rst index 6a369b7e..2a65cbd6 100644 --- a/README.rst +++ b/README.rst @@ -26,9 +26,10 @@ Specifications are proposed for a given release by adding them to the status of a blueprint for a given release can be found by looking at the blueprint in launchpad. Not all approved blueprints will get fully implemented. -Specifications have to be re-proposed for every release. The review may be -quick, but even if something was previously approved, it should be re-reviewed -to make sure it still makes sense as written. +**Previously approved specifications must be re-proposed for a new release.** +The review will most likely be quick, but we need to make sure that everyone +still understands the spec as written, and that it still fits in with the +project's plans. Prior to the Juno development cycle, this repository was not used for spec reviews. Reviews prior to Juno were completed entirely through Launchpad diff --git a/doc/source/index.rst b/doc/source/index.rst index 37effda1..ce19f6e7 100644 --- a/doc/source/index.rst +++ b/doc/source/index.rst @@ -135,10 +135,14 @@ Untargeted specs .. note:: - The following specs are ones that have been approved but have - not been completed in the planned release. Rather than leave - them in the originally planned release or remove them, they - should be made untargeted for future reference. + The following specs have been approved but have not been completed + in the originally planned release. Rather than remove them, they + have been made 'untargeted' for future reference. If you would like + to work on one of these specs, please re-propose it for the appropriate + release. The review will most likely be quick, but we need to make sure + that everyone still understands the spec as written, and that it still + fits in with the Cinder project's plans. + .. toctree:: :glob: