<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 9:36 AM, Steven Hardy <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:shardy@redhat.com" target="_blank">shardy@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 09:25:46AM -0700, Steven Dake wrote:<br>
> comments inline.<br>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Steven Hardy <<a href="mailto:shardy@redhat.com">shardy@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi all,<br>
><br>
> Over the recent PTG, and previously at the design summit in Barcelona,<br>
> we've had some productive cross-project discussions amongst the various<br>
> deployment teams.<br>
><br>
> It's clear that we share many common problems, such as patterns for<br>
> major<br>
> version upgrades (even if the workflow isn't identical we've all<br>
> duplicated<br>
> effort e.g around basic nova upgrade workflow recently), container<br>
> images<br>
> and other common building blocks for configuration management.<br>
><br>
> Here's a non-exhaustive list of sessions where we had some good<br>
> cross-project discussion, and agreed a number of common problems where<br>
> collaboration may be possible:<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ansible-config-mgt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://etherpad.openstack.<wbr>org/p/ansible-config-mgt</a><br>
><br>
> <a href="https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tripleo-kolla-kubernetes" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://etherpad.openstack.<wbr>org/p/tripleo-kolla-kubernetes</a><br>
><br>
> <a href="https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kolla-pike-ptg-images" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://etherpad.openstack.<wbr>org/p/kolla-pike-ptg-images</a><br>
><br>
> <a href="https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-ocata-fuel-tripleo-integration" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://etherpad.openstack.<wbr>org/p/fuel-ocata-fuel-tripleo-<wbr>integration</a><br>
><br>
> If there is interest in continuing the discussions on a more regular<br>
> basis,<br>
> I'd like to propose we start a cross-project working group:<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Category:Working_Groups" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstack.org/<wbr>wiki/Category:Working_Groups</a><br>
><br>
> If I go ahead and do this is "deployment" a sufficiently project-neutral<br>
> term to proceed with?<br>
><br>
</div></div>> WFM. Anything longer such as "openstack-deployment-tools" doesn't show<br>
> up very well in IRC clients. Forgive the bikeshedding;<br>
<span class="">> "openstack-deploy-tools" is very project-neutral and shows up well in IRC<br>
> clients.<br>
</span>> Â <br>
<span class="">><br>
> I'd suggest we start with an informal WG, which it seems just requires<br>
> an<br>
> update to the wiki, e.g no need for any formal project team at this<br>
> point?<br>
><br>
</span>> WFM. Since we aren't really a project team but a collection of projects<br>
<span class="">> working together, I don't think we need further formalization.<br>
</span>> Â <br>
<span class="">><br>
> Likewise I know some folks have expressed an interest in an IRC channel<br>
> (openstack-deployment?), I'm happy to start with the ML but open to IRC<br>
> also if someone is willing to set up the channel.<br>
><br>
> +1 - I think an IRC channel would be the best way for real time<br>
> communication.<br>
</span>> Â <br>
<span class="">><br>
> Perhaps we can start by using the tag "deployment" in all cross-project<br>
> ML<br>
> traffic, then potentially discuss IRC (or even regular meetings) if it<br>
> becomes apparrent these would add value beyond ML discussion?<br>
><br>
> [deploy-tools] may be better unless that breaks people's email clients.<br>
> I am out of bandwidth personally for meetings, although others may be<br>
</span>> interested in a meeting. I'm not sure what value a regular meeting would<br>
<span class="">> have and would need a chair, which may result in an inability to obtain<br>
> neutral ground.<br>
> IMO IRC and ML would be sufficient for this CP effort, however others may<br>
> have different viewpoints.<br>
<br>
</span>No strong opinion, but FWIW I chose "deployment" because I'd like to see<br>
collaboration not only around tools, but also around experiences and<br>
abstract workflow (e.g we could have all shared experiences around, say,<br>
nova upgrades without necessarily focussing on any one tool).<br>
<br>
"deployment" seems like a catch-all and it uses less characters in the<br>
subject line ;) But I'm happy to go with the consensus here.<br>
<br>
I agree ML/IRC should be sufficient, at least in the first instance.<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br></div></div></blockquote><div>Steve,</div><div><br></div><div>openstack-deployment makes sense to me given the above. The only downside I see is there is a bit of overlap with #openstack-operators given the objectives you stated. I think that is a solvable problem.</div><div><br></div><div>I've registered #openstack-deployment and #openstack-deploy-tools properly. If the OpenStack deployment project members wish to proceed, I will commit to doing the legwork of setting up the bots/etc on the final name we come up with even if it isn't one of the above two :)</div><div><br></div><div>Regards</div><div>-steve</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">
Thanks!<br>
<br>
Steve<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>______________________________<wbr>______________<br>
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.<wbr>openstack.org?subject:<wbr>unsubscribe</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/<wbr>cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/<wbr>openstack-dev</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>