[meta][K8s][API][Extended Maintenance][Operation Docs] Change SIG to Advisory status
Dear SIG members and chairs
To follow the discussion in Meta SIG PTG room [1]. I would like to propose to change the following SIGs to Advisory status [2] to represent the SIG stays around for provide help, make sure everything stays working and provide advice when needed.
- K8s SIG - API SIG - Extended Maintenance SIG - Operation Docs SIG
If you think your SIG should not belong to `advisory` statue. Please advise from the following statuses:
-
active: SIG reaches out for discussion and event, have plans for the current cycle, host meetings or send ML out regularly. -
forming: SIG still setting up. -
advisory: SIG stays around for help, make sure everything stays working and provide advice when needed. -
complete: SIG completes its mission.
If that sounds correct, I need at least one chair from each SIG +1 on [2], so we can make sure it's what SIGs agreed on.
[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PVG-meta-sig [2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/695625/
On 22/11/2019 08.03, Rico Lin wrote:
Dear SIG members and chairs
To follow the discussion in Meta SIG PTG room [1]. I would like to propose to change the following SIGs to Advisory status [2] to represent the SIG stays around for provide help, make sure everything stays working and provide advice when needed.
- K8s SIG
- API SIG
- Extended Maintenance SIG
- Operation Docs SIG
Two questions:
1) Are there even enough people around for these to be advisors?
2) What is going to happen with artifacts of Operations Docs SIG: https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/arch-design - no real change since 1 year.
https://review.opendev.org/#/q/project:openstack/operations-guide has a bit more activity.
What will happen with these two documents if the Operation Docs SIG becomes advisory state?
Should we retire the repos and delete the content?
I don't know whether the other SIGS own any deliverables, where we need to discuss what to do with them,
Andreas
[...]
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 4:21 PM Andreas Jaeger aj@suse.com wrote:
What will happen with these two documents if the Operation Docs SIG becomes advisory state?
Should we retire the repos and delete the content?
As mentioned in patch review, I will try to get Chris or Sean to provide input to this ML
I don't know whether the other SIGS own any deliverables, where we need to discuss what to do with them,
We don't allow SIGs to own any deliverables at the current stage. as defined in [1] ``Project team is required when planning for release a deliverable service``
Andreas
[...]
-- Andreas Jaeger aj@suse.com Twitter: jaegerandi SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D 90409 Nürnberg (HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg) GF: Felix Imendörffer GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
[1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/comparison-of-official-group-s...
-- May The Force of OpenStack Be With You, Rico Lin irc: ricolin
---- On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 01:03:47 -0600 Rico Lin rico.lin.guanyu@gmail.com wrote ----
Dear SIG members and chairs To follow the discussion in Meta SIG PTG room [1]. I would like to propose to change the following SIGs to Advisory status [2] to represent the SIG stays around for provide help, make sure everything stays working and provide advice when needed.K8s SIG API SIG Extended Maintenance SIG Operation Docs SIG If you think your SIG should not belong to `advisory` statue. Please advise from the following statuses:active: SIG reaches out for discussion and event, have plans for the current cycle, host meetings or send ML out regularly.
forming: SIG still setting up.
advisory: SIG stays around for help, make sure everything stays working and provide advice when needed.
Thanks a lot Rico for all your effort for the SIG help and management.
+1. I like the 'advisory' status which will clear out the difference between inactive and "active but with on-demand services only". One question on this status- Does this still include the updates on repo/guidance doc etc ? For Example: if I want to add a few more guidelines or changes to current repo/doc-sites etc then this SIG will still go with usual discussion and review process and not saying that 'we are in an advisory role so we have closed any repo/doc update'.
It will be good if you can explain those statuses in detail with their scope activity in sig-guidelines doc.
API SIG
Is it ok to move api-sig to 'advisory'? I think Michael mentioned about some work to finish on traiging the current open issues/todo etc. Should we wait for that work to be finished? May be Michael or Dmitry can update on the latest status.
complete: SIG completes its mission.
Can we include some status for the inactive SIG who has not completed its mission? something like 'On-Hold' or 'Need-help' etc. It will help if anyone looking for that SIG can help or manage. It is more like backlogs for history and reference if same type of problem comes and someone wants to form a SIG.
[1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-August/008683.ht...
-gmann
If that sounds correct, I need at least one chair from each SIG +1 on [2], so we can make sure it's what SIGs agreed on. [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/PVG-meta-sig%5B2] https://review.opendev.org/#/c/695625/
-- May The Force of OpenStack Be With You, Rico Lin irc: ricolin
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 1:35 AM Ghanshyam Mann gmann@ghanshyammann.com wrote:
Thanks a lot Rico for all your effort for the SIG help and management.
+1. I like the 'advisory' status which will clear out the difference
between inactive and "active but with on-demand services only".
One question on this status- Does this still include the updates on
repo/guidance doc etc ? For Example: if I want to add a few more
guidelines or changes to current repo/doc-sites etc then this SIG will
still go with usual discussion and review process and not
saying that 'we are in an advisory role so we have closed any repo/doc
update'.
It will be good if you can explain those statuses in detail with their
scope activity in sig-guidelines doc.
Let's separate patches and add a sig-status.rst file and define each status in detail.
API SIG
Is it ok to move api-sig to 'advisory'? I think Michael mentioned about
some work to finish on traiging the
current open issues/todo etc. Should we wait for that work to be
finished? May be Michael or Dmitry
can update on the latest status.
It's always up to SIG to tell us what their real status is. And I will not merge that patch until we have chair's +1 from each SIG. Will ping Michael and Dmitry to ask for their feedback on this.
complete: SIG completes its mission.
Can we include some status for the inactive SIG who has not completed its
mission? something like 'On-Hold' or 'Need-help' etc.
It will help if anyone looking for that SIG can help or manage. It is
more like backlogs for history and reference if same type of problem
comes and someone wants to form a SIG.
Here's one interesting fact, we alway delete the SIG as soon as it's no longer required. But we make complete status because SIG might need to keep their repo. We can protentially create a backlog file for SIGs so others can looks up during working on new SIG idea. And this will make sigs.yaml file more clear (contains only forming/active/advisory SIG)
participants (3)
-
Andreas Jaeger
-
Ghanshyam Mann
-
Rico Lin