Thank you Susendra.
Agree that the current de-branding changes should merge in an orderly way.
For the “References to Titanium, cgcs, tis” I suggest that we focus on the changes that are visible to end users first, e.g. messages written to log files. I think changing text in source code comments and
other innocuous places is not a priority. Suggest doing the changes in batches so they can be reviewed easily.
brucej
From: Selvaraj, Susendra <susendra.selvaraj@intel.com>
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 9:37 AM
To: scott.little@windriver.com; Jones, Bruce E <bruce.e.jones@intel.com>
Cc: starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io
Subject: FW: [Starlingx-discuss] [Build] Debranding
Hello Scott, Bruce,
Below is the information gathered on De-branding –
Story board: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2006387
·
Merged: Changes to .spec & .service files.
·
Review: Blocked on workflow label, Needs workflow label ??
·
Todo: starlingx/ha (no reference), stx-tools, starlingx/update
Existing De-brand Topic:
https://review.opendev.org/#/q/status:+open+branch:master+topic:debrand_wip
·
Removal of stx-r1 & pike changes are also part of this topic.
·
File extensions include - .xml, .py, Dockerfile, .rst, buildrc, .sh, generate-cgcs-tis-repo, make*
Current Analysis - Flock layer path: /localdisk/designer/stx40/flock/cgcs-root/
·
References to 'Titanium' included in below file types -
o
.py, .h, .cpp, .yaml, .cfg, .txt, .rst
o
.bash_completion, PKG_INFO, hwmon, hbsAgent, mtcAgent, *password*, *collect*, .ocf
·
References to Titanium, cgcs & tis
Baseline path |
References (w/o binary files) |
Count |
Distinct Files (w/o binary files) |
Count |
/localdisk/designer/stx40/flock/ |
grep -rnsw -I "Titanium" ./* | wc |
120 |
grep -rnsw -I -l "Titanium" ./* | w |
77 |
/localdisk/designer/stx40/flock |
grep -rnsw -I "cgcs*" ./* | w |
483 |
grep -rnsw -I -l "cgcs*" ./* | wc |
151 |
/localdisk/designer/stx40/flock |
grep -rnsw -I "tis*" ./* | w |
3194 |
grep -rnsw -I -l "tis*" ./* | wc |
91 |
We can start with merging the existing De-brand topic. Please let me know for comments.
Regards,
Susendra.
From: N, Poornima Y <poornima.y.n@intel.com>
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 11:59 AM
To: Selvaraj, Susendra <susendra.selvaraj@intel.com>
Subject: FW: [Starlingx-discuss] [Build] Debranding
From: Jones, Bruce E <bruce.e.jones@intel.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 10:19 PM
To: starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Build] Debranding
Scott, thank you for taking up the lead on this. I support the effort, as it has benefits both for cleaning up the code and for removing the need to explain just what a cgcs is.
I encourage the community to actively support Scott, reviewing the patches and helping move this forward.
brucej
From: Scott Little <scott.little@windriver.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 8:19 AM
To: starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io
Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] [Build] Debranding
We need a thread for the discussion of Debranding. Interested parties should reply here.
Intent is the removal of references to cgcs, tis,