[tc] Project repository namespaces

Lingxian Kong anlin.kong at gmail.com
Mon Mar 18 21:01:22 UTC 2019

I vote for option 2, without too much complexity

Lingxian Kong

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 9:53 AM Jim Rollenhagen <jim at jimrollenhagen.com>

> Hi all,
> With OpenDev needing to change git URLs for all projects, we have an
> opportunity to change how we namespace projects that are currently under
> the "openstack" namespace.[0]
> I've heard a few options thrown out:
> 1) Keep everything the same. This is the easiest option for everybody, but
>    keeps our current confusion of what is officially OpenStack, and what is
>    not.
> 2) Move unofficial projects to "stackforge" or some other namespace, which
> is
>    only a small amount of work to list the repositories, but probably a
> large
>    amount of bikeshedding^Wdiscussion to come up with a name.
> 3) Do (2), but also namespace the OpenStack projects in a more fine-grained
>    manner, by project team. For example: nova/nova, ironic/bifrost, etc.
>    This is a larger chunk of work, but looks a bit nicer. Also makes it
> easier
>    to move a project out of OpenStack later, as we don't have to move
>    namespaces. This has an open question of whether we use one large
> namespace
>    for unofficial projects, or give them each their own. It also has a
> downside
>    of making more effort to move a repository between project teams, though
>    I think that's fairly rare.
> 4) ??
> I personally like (2) or (3), but would like to hear from the rest of the
> community. I'll propose a governance resolution after the discussion here,
> and we can follow from there with whatever else needs to be done.
> // jim
> [0]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-March/003603.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20190319/00a29161/attachment.html>

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list