Open Stack

Hello Everyone, 

We just finished our combined defcore + defcore capabilities meeting. Thanks to everyone that attended and provided feedback, notes from the meeting are bellow.

Action items for everyone interested in DefCore:
1. Review the initial draft for the process and provide feedback: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/165216
2. Tell us how many core reviewers we should have for openstack/defcore project. During the meeting, we talked about having a smaller group of core reviewers. Right now, core reviewers are myself, Rob Hirschfeld, and Chris Hoge. If you think the group should be larger, list your reasons. We do have additional volunteers for core reviewers.

Thank you,

Egle


Meeting Notes:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreScale.8

Note: Today's meeting will be combined with the DefCore capabilities meeting.
# AgendaFeedback on Initial draft of the DefCore Process ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/165216 )Core reviewers for defcore: https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/uuid-ad95fb605fa544dab35712194df7faaa10ec7a22,membersReminder: submit/discuss tests that should be flagged
Roll Call:Egle Sigler (Co-Chair, Rackspace)Chris Lee (DreamHost)Mark T. Voelker (VMware)Jim Meyer (HP)Carol Barrett (Intel)Will Auld (Intel)Catherine Diep (IBM)Vince Brunssen (IBM)Van Lindberg (Rackspace)Adrian Otto (Rackspace)
Notes:   
 Definition for designated sections missing, they are in the lexicon.rst
 file. Need to iterate on the definition more before going in. [1]   
 Core reviewers will appoint other core reviewers. Take it to the 
mailing list. Propose a small list. Chris Lee from dreamhost 
volunteered. Van L is also willing. Jim and Mark also happy to be a reviewers and happy to be excluded.  Vince Brunssen (IBM) would also be willing to be a core reviewer.    For .03 tests, See decision below.         Question about Foundation requirements, C1.3 and C2.    For section C1.4, should clearly label the published self-tests as unreviewed.     Rocky would like release management items in the process.     
Decision on UUIDs vs Fully-Qualified names (FQNs):FQNs will be used for 2015.03The
 question of FQNs vs UUIDs is re-evaluated for each spec release until 
the social and technical issues with UUIDs are resolved (or UUIDs are 
dropped)When UUIDs are adopted, there is a major version bump for the json spec.UUID related bug filed: https://bugs.launchpad.net/tempest/+bug/1433700
[1] Here's the snip from https://review.openstack.org/#/c/165216/3/lexicon.rst: (note: please comment in Gerrit, not here)    Mark T. Voelker 18 Mar 2015 10:36a   
 Shamail had a good suggestion that we add a definition of designated 
sections here, but I'm not sure that has been completely worked out. 
Vaguely, we have something like this (pulling liberally from some of 
Rob's earlier slides and modifying slightly since the integrated release
 is on the way out):Designated
 Sections - portions of the OpenStack codebase that must be used in 
order to meet the OpenStack trademark. Designated sections fulfill one 
or more of three criteria: 1) they provide the project-external REST 
API; 2) are shared and provide common functionality for all options; 3) 
implement logic that is critical for cross-platform operation. 
Designated sections must exist in the OpenStack gerrit namespace and 
have corresponding tests. Code that meets the following criteria will 
not be considered designated: provides vendor-specific functionality, 
are explicitly intended by the project maintainers to be replaceable, 
extend the project REST API in a new or different way, or code that is 
being deprecated.That's a bit wordy compared to the other definitions here, but it's a start. What do folks think?





 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/defcore-committee/attachments/20150318/5c4a8cc6/attachment.html>