Mostly seems right, should the containers (nee: k8s) be part of the Containers team instead of distro? I don't think we have a container's project in governance, but it would seem we should. Sau! On 9/5/19 9:44 AM, Scott Little wrote:
compile (derived from from integ) Governance group: distro PL: Cindy Xie TL: Saul Wold
config-files (derived from from integ) Governance group:distro PL: Cindy Xie TL: Saul Wold
helm-charts (derived from config) Governance group: config PL: Dariush Eslimi TL: John Kung
kubernetes (derived from from integ) Governance group: distro PL: Cindy Xie TL: Saul Wold
monitor-armada-app (derived from upstream and config) ... Note: upstream is not listed in governance! Governance group: config PL: Dariush Eslimi TL: John Kung
monitoring (derived from from integ) Governance group: distro PL: Cindy Xie TL: Saul Wold
openstack-armada-app (derived from upstream and config) ... Note: upstream is not listed in governance! Governance group: config PL: Dariush Eslimi TL: John Kung
platform-armada-app (derived from config) Governance group: config PL: Dariush Eslimi TL: John Kung
puppet (derived from config) Governance group: config PL: Dariush Eslimi TL: John Kung
utilities (derived mostly from integ) Governance group: distro PL: Cindy Xie TL: Saul Wold
On 2019-09-05 10:41 a.m., Wensley, Barton wrote:
For almost all of these, shouldn’t they just inherit the PL/TL from the repo they were branched from?
Bart
*From:*Scott Little [mailto:scott.little@windriver.com] *Sent:* September 5, 2019 10:24 AM *To:* starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io *Subject:* Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Important] repo restructuring
I'll need to update the governance file reference/tsc/projects.yaml
We need to identify project and technical leads for the new repos.
compile config-files helm-charts kubernetes monitor-armada-app monitoring openstack-armada-app platform-armada-app puppet utilities
On 2019-09-04 9:50 a.m., Scott Little wrote:
Reminder
Please treat the code base as frozen. No gerrit reviews, other than the restructuring reviews I'll be publishing today, should be receiving a WF+1 until further notice.
Thanks for your cooperation.
Scott
On 2019-09-03 2:33 p.m., Scott Little wrote:
Pending a final green sanity result, the tentative restructure day will be Sept 4 (tomorrow).
Please freeze ALL code submissions, starting at 1 pm UTC on Sept 4, until further notice.
I'll be running a repo split tool. It will generate more than a dozen code reviews that will ALL have to be merged before we can unfreeze the code for general updates.
After everything has merged, you'll need to ...
1) If you are working on code that has not been relocated (refer to spreadsheet [3]) then 'repo sync --force-sync' be sufficient. Before doing that, be sure to save your work as a commit on a private working branch.
2) If your working on code that has been relocated, Then your best bet is to start with a fresh 'repo init' into a new working directory. Use 'git format-patch' or 'diff' to capture your work, and apply the patch at the new location. Some surgery to path names may be required.
Scott Little
On 2019-08-30 4:09 p.m., Scott Little wrote:
The layered build feature is getting ready for its initial required changes [1] [2].
The first phase is a restructuring of the StarlingX git repos to enable layered builds in the next phase. In light of new package additions in the last few weeks, there has been a few modifications and additions to the spreadsheet [3] documenting all the intended moves. Edits are in blue text. The intent is that all package relocations will be history preserving.
We plan to implement the git restructuring on the week of September 3-6.
My initial ask of the StarlingX community is that we *temporarily freeze the addition of any new packages* while we make a final test run. This means that any updates that touch a centos_pkgs_dir file should not receive a WF+1 until the relocation is complete. After the relocation, you may need to re-issue your code review.
Thanks for your co-operation.
Scott Little
[1] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/672288/
[2] https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2006166
[3] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1zURL1UlDST8lnvw3dMlNWN6pkLX6EVF6TDBw...
_______________________________________________
Starlingx-discuss mailing list
Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io <mailto:Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io>
http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
_______________________________________________
Starlingx-discuss mailing list
Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io <mailto:Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io>
http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
_______________________________________________
Starlingx-discuss mailing list
Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io <mailto:Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io>
http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
_______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss