Open Stack

Rico Lin <rico.lin.guanyu at gmail.com> wrote: 
>Dear all
>
>To continue the discussion of whether we should have new SIG for 
>autoscaling. 
>
>I think we already got enough time for this ML  [1], and it's time to jump 
>to the next step. 
>As we got a lot of positive feedbacks from ML [1], I think it's definitely 
>considered an action to create a new SIG, do some init works, and finally 
>Here are some things that we can start right now, to come out with the name 
>of SIG, the definition and mission. 
>
>Here's my draft plan: 
>To create a SIG name `Automatic SIG`, with given initial mission to improve 
>automatic scaling with (but not limited to) OpenStack. As we discussed in 
>forum [2], to have scenario tests and documents will be considered as 
>actions for the initial mission. I gonna assume we will start from 
>scenarios which already provide some basic tests and documents which we can 
>adapt very soon and use them to build a SIG environment. And the long-term 
>mission of this SIG is to make sure we provide good documentation and test 
>coverage for most automatic functionality. 
>
>I suggest `Automatic SIG` instead of `Autoscaling SIG` to make sure we can 
>provide more value if there are more needs in the future. Just like the 
>example which Adam raised `self-optimizing` from people who are 
>using watcher [3]. 
>Let me know if you got any concerns about this name. 

I'm +1 for creating the SIG, although "Automatic SIG" doesn't sound 
quite right to me, because it's not clear what is being automated. 
For example from the outside people might think it was a SIG about CI, 
or about automated testing, or both - or even some kind of automatic 
creation of new SIGs ;-) 

Here are some alternative suggestions: 

- Optimization SIG
- Self-optimization SIG
- Auto-optimization SIG
- Adaptive Cloud SIG
- Self-adaption SIG
- Auto-adaption SIG
- Auto-configuration SIG

although I'm not sure these are a huge improvement on "Autoscaling 
SIG" - maybe some are too broad, or too vague.  It depends on how 
likely it is that the scope will go beyond just auto-scaling.  Of 
course you could also just stick with the original idea of 
"Auto-scaling" :-) 

>And to clarify, there will definitely some cross SIG co-work between this 
>new SIG and Self-Healing SIG (there're some common requirements even across 
>self-healing and autoscaling features.). We also need to make sure we do 
>not provide any duplicated work against self-healing SIG. 
>As a start, let's only focus on autoscaling scenario, and make sure we're 
>doing it right before we move to multiple cases. 

Sounds good! 

>If no objection, I will create the new SIG before next weekend and plan a 
>short schedule in Denver summit and PTG. 

Thanks for driving this!