[Starlingx-discuss] [Important] repo restructuring
Jones, Bruce E
bruce.e.jones at intel.com
Thu Sep 5 17:24:41 UTC 2019
I'm reviewing the Project List [1].
We used to have a distro.openstack project and a distro.nonopenstack project. Now I see a Distro project. Did we merge them? I think we can/should if we haven’t.
The project Wiki page [2] lists several projects that are not on the list: P2->P3, Zuul, DevStack & StarlingX-in-a-box. I don't think we need these as separate projects anymore. Should we remove them from the Wiki?
Brucej
[1] https://docs.starlingx.io/governance/reference/tsc/projects/index.html
[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StarlingX
-----Original Message-----
From: Rowsell, Brent [mailto:Brent.Rowsell at windriver.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 10:03 AM
To: Saul Wold <sgw at linux.intel.com>; starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Important] repo restructuring
I will be updating the governance as per the TSC call this morning
Brent
-----Original Message-----
From: Saul Wold [mailto:sgw at linux.intel.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 5, 2019 1:00 PM
To: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
Subject: Re: [Starlingx-discuss] [Important] repo restructuring
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 at windriver.com]
>> *Sent:* September 5, 2019 10:24 AM
>> *To:* starlingx-discuss at 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/1zURL1UlDST8lnvw3dMlNWN6pkLX6E
>> VF6TDBwNR9TQik/edit#gid=1697053891
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Starlingx-discuss mailing list
>>
>> Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
>> <mailto: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
>> <mailto: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
>> <mailto: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
_______________________________________________
Starlingx-discuss mailing list
Starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
More information about the Starlingx-discuss
mailing list