Open Stack

On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Stefano Maffulli <stefano at openstack.org> wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> we're working on a quarterly report of activities in all our git and
> gerrit repositories to understand the dynamics of contributions across
> different dimensions. This report will be similar to what Bitergia
> produced at release time.
>
> I'd like to discuss more widely the format of how to meaningfully group
> the information presented. One basic need is to have a top level view
> and then drill down based on the release status of each project. A
> suggested classification would be based on the programs.yaml file:
>
> - OpenStack Software (top level overview):
>    - integrated
>    - incubated
>    - clients
>    - other:
>        devstack
>        deployment
>        common libraries
> - OpenStack Quality Assurance
> - OpenStack Documentation
> - OpenStack Infrastructure
> - OpenStack Release management
>
> It seems easy but based on that grouping, integrated and incubated git
> repositories are easy to spot in programs.yaml (they have
> integrated-since attribute).
>
> Let's have the Sahara program as an example:
>
>   projects:
>     - repo: openstack/sahara
>       incubated-since: icehouse
>       integrated-since: juno
>     - repo: openstack/python-saharaclient
>     - repo: openstack/sahara-dashboard
>     - repo: openstack/sahara-extra
>     - repo: openstack/sahara-image-elements
>     - repo: openstack/sahara-specs
>
> So, for the OpenStack Software part:
> * openstack/sahara is integrated in juno and incubated since icehouse.
> * Then clients: python-saharaclient is easy to spot. Is it standard and
> accepted practice that all client projects are called
> python-$PROGRAM-NAMEclient?
> * And what about the rest of the sahara-* projects: where would they go?
> with openstack/sahara? or somewhere else, in others? devstack?
> common-libraries?

That section of the file used to be organized in to separate lists for
incubated, integrated, and "other" repositories. We changed it when we
started tracking the incubation and integration dates. So it seems
like just listing them under sahara as "other" would make sense.

>
> Other repositories for which I have no clear classification:
>
>     - repo: openstack/swift-bench
>     - repo: openstack/django_openstack_auth
>     - repo: openstack/tuskar-ui
>     - repo: openstack/heat-cfntools
>     - repo: openstack/heat-specs
>     - repo: openstack/heat-templates
>     - repo: openstack-dev/heat-cfnclient
>     - repo: openstack/trove-integration
>     - repo: openstack/ironic-python-agent
>     - repo: stackforge/kite
>
> Any suggestions on how you would like to see these classified: with
> together with the integrated/incubated 'parent' program (sahara with
> sahara-dashboard, sahara-extra etc  or separately under 'other'? Or
> they're all different and we need to look at them one by one?

I would think they would go with their parent program, no?

Doug

>
> Let me know what you think (tomorrow office hour, 11am PDT, is a good
> time to chat about this).
>
> Cheers,
> stef
>
> --
> Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev