[Starlingx-discuss] [Important] repo restructuring

[Scott Little]

A concern was raised that repos named 'puppet' and 'kubernetes' might 
imply forks of those projects.

Content wise, it's clearly not the case.  But it might be used in 
anti-StarlingX FUD.

Any objections to renaming the repos 'stx-puppet' and 'containers' instead?

Scott





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/1zURL1UlDST8lnvw3dMlNWN6pkLX6EVF6TDBwNR9TQik/edit#gid=1697053891 
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
> http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.starlingx.io/pipermail/starlingx-discuss/attachments/20190904/bd281cb3/attachment.html>