[openstack-dev] [Interop-wg] [QA] [PTG] [Interop] [Designate] [Heat] [TC]: QA PTG Summary- Interop test for adds-on project
doug at doughellmann.com
Thu Mar 8 17:57:59 UTC 2018
Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2018-03-08 12:45:11 -0500:
> On 07/03/18 08:44, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
> > I mean i am all ok with separate plugin which is more easy for QA team
> > but ownership to QA is kind of going to same direction(QA team
> > maintaining interop ads-on tests) in more difficult way.
> After reading this and the logs from the QA meeting, I feel like
> there is some confusion/miscommunication over what the proposed
> resolution means by 'ownership'. Basically every Git repo has to be
> registered to *some* project in
> The proposal was to register the trademark test plugins to the QA
> project. The implications of this are fairly minimal in my view:
> * The project gets a say on any new repo creation requests (this will
> help maintain e.g. a consistent naming scheme IMO)
> * Contributors to the repos are considered contributors to the project,
> get to vote in the PTL elections, and are allowed to put the logo
> sticker on their laptop. (This seems appropriate to me, and in the
> best case might even help convert some people into becoming core
> reviewers for QA in the long term.)
> * The project would have to meet any other obligations in regards to
> those repos that the TC delegates to project teams and PTLs - though
> none of the ones I can think of (releases, tracking project-wide goals)
> would really apply in practice to the repos we're talking about.
> Perhaps I am missing something that you have a specific concern with?
> It is *not* meant to imply that the project has an obligation to write
> tests (nobody expects this, in fact), nor that the core reviewers it
> contributes to the core review team for the repo have any stronger
> obligation to do reviews than any of the other core reviewers (we really
> want all 3 teams to contribute to reviews, since they each bring
> different expertise).
> I think we have two options that could resolve this:
> * Change the wording to ensure that future readers cannot interpret the
> resolution as placing obligations on the QA team that we didn't intend
> and they do not want; or
> * Register the Git repos to the refstack project instead.
>  kidding! Everyone knows you can't have the sticker until after the
> initiation ;)
Why would the repos be owned by anyone other than the original project
More information about the OpenStack-dev