I like 3 but will settle for 2 to minimize work.

 

From: Lingxian Kong <anlin.kong@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, March 18, 2019 4:01 PM
To: Jim Rollenhagen
Cc: openstack-discuss
Subject: Re: [tc] Project repository namespaces

 

[EXTERNAL EMAIL]

I vote for option 2, without too much complexity


Cheers,
Lingxian Kong

 

 

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 9:53 AM Jim Rollenhagen <jim@jimrollenhagen.com> wrote:

Hi all,

 

With OpenDev needing to change git URLs for all projects, we have an

opportunity to change how we namespace projects that are currently under

the "openstack" namespace.[0]

 

I've heard a few options thrown out:

 

1) Keep everything the same. This is the easiest option for everybody, but

   keeps our current confusion of what is officially OpenStack, and what is

   not.

 

2) Move unofficial projects to "stackforge" or some other namespace, which is

   only a small amount of work to list the repositories, but probably a large

   amount of bikeshedding^Wdiscussion to come up with a name.

 

3) Do (2), but also namespace the OpenStack projects in a more fine-grained

   manner, by project team. For example: nova/nova, ironic/bifrost, etc.

   This is a larger chunk of work, but looks a bit nicer. Also makes it easier

   to move a project out of OpenStack later, as we don't have to move

   namespaces. This has an open question of whether we use one large namespace

   for unofficial projects, or give them each their own. It also has a downside

   of making more effort to move a repository between project teams, though

   I think that's fairly rare.

 

4) ??

 

I personally like (2) or (3), but would like to hear from the rest of the

community. I'll propose a governance resolution after the discussion here,

and we can follow from there with whatever else needs to be done.

 

// jim