Open Stack

Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2019-03-19 10:45:42 +0100 (+0100), Thierry Carrez wrote:
> [...]
>> 4) Create several namespaces to match the OpenStack map[1] buckets:
>>
>> - openstack/ to hold first-level components in the central box
>> - openstack-operations/ to hold operational tooling from the rights box
>> - openstack-lifecyclemanagement/ to hold deployment recipes
>> - openstack-user/ for SDK and CLI
>> - openstack-adjacentenablers/ for adjacent tech bridges
>>
>> Plus:
>> - openstack-libs/ to hold libraries and second-order dependencies
>> - openstack-dev/ for all repositories that we end up creating in order to
>> get things done but have otherwise no relationship with the end product
>>
>> [1] https://openstack.org/openstack-map
> [...]
> 
> While this will work fine for replicating from Gerrit to the
> opendev.org Gitea, it does necessarily imply centralized control
> over and maintenance of credentials for replicating to outside
> services like GitHub or Bitbucket. Under the org-per-team model
> those org credential secrets can be safely carried in and managed by
> the individual teams' core reviewers. With cross-team orgs, you need
> an identified body to care for the repository containing the
> replication job secrets and curating the various categories. *If*
> there is a group of volunteers to take on that work, then it seems
> like a reasonable plan to me.

Actually, I'd argue that we *need to* follow a common policy to define 
how "OpenStack" appears on GitHub/Bitbucket. I think having 
per-project-team replication policies could result in a very weird 
landscape.

So I see having a single identified body to care for all those 
organizations as a feature rather than a bug :) I'm happy to volunteer 
to do that, as a TC member or as a OSF staff member, depending how much 
the rest of the TC wants to have a say in social code marketing 
properties like GitHub.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)