[openstack-dev] [Openstack-sigs] [Openstack-operators] [QA] Proposal for a QA SIG
ghanshyammann at gmail.com
Mon Nov 20 02:26:02 UTC 2017
On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 11:39 PM, Chandan kumar <chkumar246 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Ghanshyam Mann <ghanshyammann at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:41 AM, Andrea Frittoli
>> <andrea.frittoli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:33 PM Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>
>>>> Andrea Frittoli wrote:
>>>> > [...]
>>>> > during the last summit in Sydney we discussed the possibility of
>>>> > creating an
>>>> > OpenStack quality assurance special interest group (OpenStack QA SIG).
>>>> > The proposal was discussed during the QA feedback session  and it
>>>> > received
>>>> > positive feedback there; I would like to bring now the proposal to a
>>>> > larger
>>>> > audience via the SIG, dev and operators mailing lists.
>>>> > [...]
>> Yea, This will greatly help QA team to get more interest from
>> downstream QA teams and sharing
>> of QA practice, scenarios & tools. I am happy to volunteer for this effort.
>>>> I think this goes with the current trends of re-centering upstream
>>>> "project teams" on the production of software, while using SIGs as
>>>> communities of practice (beyond the governance boundaries), even if they
>>>> happen to produce (some) software as the result of their work.
>>>> One question I have is whether we'd need to keep the "QA" project team
>>>> at all. Personally I think it would create confusion to keep it around,
>>>> for no gain. SIGs code contributors get voting rights for the TC anyway,
>>>> and SIGs are free to ask for space at the PTG... so there is really no
>>>> reason (imho) to keep a "QA" project team in parallel to the SIG ?
>>> That is a possibility indeed, but I think co-existance will be the case for
>>> bit at least - we may decide to drop the QA program eventually depending
>>> on how the experience with the SIG goes.
>> Yea, we can think of merging both based on progress and how this SIG
>> provide us the practical benefits. Probably this idea might solve less
>> contributors issue where more people from downstream start
>> participating in QA but as of now I cannot say anything on this.
>> In current situation, it will be difficult to not have QA project
>> team. QA has around 15 projects
>> and few of active projects like Tempest, Devstack, Grenade, Patrole,
>> O-H need dedicated team to
>> maintain and implement them. Grouping them under single SIG will be
>> another challenge to get a dedicated
>> attention to them.
>> Currently I see the proposed QA SIG as a common platform for different
>> entity like OpenStack upstream, downstream QA and
>> other community like opnfv etc. to share best practice, tooling etc.
>> For example, opnfv shown much interest in on-ongoing OpenStack
>> "extreme testing" and this SIG can play important role to
>> shape this project in good/efficient direction. But we need a
>> dedicated set of people to lead/implement it.
>> Another point/idea is to consider and run this QA SIG as one of the
>> effort under QA program along with project team which can be lead by
>> common leader(QA PTL) to make sure both
>> effort goes in smooth and syncing way.
> Thanks Andreaf for starting it. I am happy to help.
> It is a great idea to bring more people under QA as well as help to
> share best practices
> and tools with in OpenStack community.
> I have one query, Are we also planning to collaborate with other
> communities like Ansible, K8s and others for the same?
Yea there is no limitation to any community as such. Anyone want to
collaborate on QA are most welcome. For k8s, we discussed in last PTG
to start the k8s clients and collaborative testing effort (if i
remember correctly that proposal was from dmellado).
> Chandan Kumar
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev