Open Stack

Rico Lin <rico.lin.guanyu at gmail.com> wrote: 
>Dear all
>
>Here is the summary for forum `Expose SIGs and WGs` (etherpad [1] ). 
>This concept still under development, so this is an open discussion and 
>we need more feedbacks. 
>Here are some general agreements on actions or ideas that we think it's 
>worth to find the answer. 

Thanks for driving this, Rico!  And sorry for the slow reply. 

>*Set up guidelines for SIGs/WGs/Teams for interaction specific to this 
>around tracking cross-project work* 
>We tend to agree that we kind of lack for a guideline or a sample for 
>SIGs/WGs, since all SIGs/WGs formed for different interest, we won't try to 
>unify tools (unless that's what everyone agrees on) or rules for all 
>groups. What we can do is to give more help to groups and provide a clear 
>way for how they can set up cross-project works if they want to. Also, we 
>can provide information on how to reach to users, ops, and developers and 
>bridge them up. And we can even do a more general guideline or sample on 
>how other SIGs/WGs are doing with their own workflow. Like self-healing SIG 
>working on getting user story and feedback and use them to general better 
>document/guideline for other users. Also, public cloud WG working on 
>collect issues from public cloud providers and bring those issues to 
>projects. Those IMO are great examples that we should put them down 
>somewhere for cross SIGs/WGs consideration. 

We already have some basic guidelines for communication here: 

    https://governance.openstack.org/sigs/

Maybe we should just extend that with some suggested best practices? 
For example: 

  - Set up an openstack/$signame-sig git repository
    (we could even create a cookiecutter repo, or is that overkill?)

  - Set up a StoryBoard project linked with that git repository

  - For cross-project collaboration, recommend the following:

      - submit cross-project stories to StoryBoard

      - submit cross-project specs to the SIG's git repo
        (and the SIG lead could set up a template for these,
        e.g. http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/self-healing-sig/tree/specs/template.rst )

      - post cross-project discussion to openstack-discuss@ with
        [$signame-sig] and all the appropriate [$project] tags
        in the Subject header

>As a further idea, we can even 
>discuss if it's a common interest to have a SIG to help on SIGs. 

We already have that ;-)  It's the "meta" SIG, mentioned here: 

    https://governance.openstack.org/sigs/

>*A workflow for tracking:* 
>This kind of follow above item. If we're going to set up a workflow, what 
>we can add in to help people live an easier life? This is also an idea that 
>no one in the room thinks it's a bad one, so it means in long term, it 
>might worth our time to provide more clear information on what exactly 
>workflow that we suggest everyone use. 

Doesn't StoryBoard handle tracking nicely? 

>*Discuss SIG spec repo*: 
>The discussion here is how can we monitoring SIGs/WGs health and track 
>tasks. When talking about tasks we not just talking about bugs, but also 
>features that's been considered as essential tasks for SIGs/WGs. We need a 
>place to put them down in a trackable way (from a user story to a patch for 
>implementation). 

Again I think StoryBoard works nicely for this. 

>*Ask foundation about have project update for SIGs/WGs*: 
>One action we can start right now is to let SIGs/WGs present a project 
>update  (or even like a session but give each group 5 mins to present). 
>This should help group getting more attention. And even capable to send 
>out messages like what's the most important features or bug fixes they 
>need from project teams, or what's the most important tasks that are under 
>planning or working on. 
>Fortunately, we got Melvin Hillsman (UC) volunteer on this task. 

Yes, I think this is really important.  And from personal experience 
as a SIG chair, I know it would help me to have someone pestering me 
to provide project updates ;-) 

>The thing that we also wish to do is to clear the message here. We think 
>most of the tools are already there, so we shouldn't need to ask project 
>teams to do any huge change. But still, we found there are definitely some 
>improvements that we can do to better bridge users, ops, and developers. 
>You might find some information here didn't give you a clear answer. And 
>that's because of we still under open discussion for this. And I assume we 
>gonna keep finding actions from discussions that we can do right away. We 
>will try to avoid that we have to do the exact same session with the same 
>argument over and over again. 
>So please give your feedback, any idea, or give us your help if you also 
>care about this. 

Yes, I think you are right.  My simple suggestion is above: just add some 
best practices to the governance-sigs page.