[qa][cinder][devstack] proposed governance changes for some devstack plugins
rosmaita.fossdev at gmail.com
Thu Mar 5 19:49:11 UTC 2020
On 3/4/20 5:40 PM, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
> ---- On Wed, 04 Mar 2020 13:53:00 -0600 Brian Rosmaita <rosmaita.fossdev at gmail.com> wrote ----
> > Hello QA team and devstack-plugin-ceph-core people,
> > The Cinder team has some proposals we'd like to float.
> > 1. The Cinder team is interested in becoming more active in the
> > maintenance of openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph . Currently, the
> > devstack-plugin-ceph-core is
> > https://review.opendev.org/#/admin/groups/1196,members
> > The cinder-core is already represented by Eric and Sean; we'd like to
> > replace them by including the cinder-core group.
> +1. This is good diea and make sense, I will do the change.
> > 2. The Cinder team is interested in becoming more active in the
> > maintenance of x/devstack-plugin-nfs . Currently, the
> > devstack-plugin-nfs-core is
> > https://review.opendev.org/#/admin/groups/1330,members
> > It's already 75% cinder-core members; we'd like to replace the
> > individual members with the cinder-core group. We also propose that
> > devstack-core be added as an included group.
> > 3. The Cinder team is interested in implementing a new devstack plugin:
> > openstack/devstack-plugin-open-cas
> > This will enable thorough testing of a new feature  being introduced
> > as experimental in Ussuri and expected to be finalized in Victoria. Our
> > plan would be to make both cinder-core and devstack-core included groups
> > for the gerrit group governing the new plugin.
> +1. You want this under Cinder governance or under QA ?
I think it makes sense for these to be under QA governance -- QA would
own the repo with both QA and Cinder having permission to make changes.
> > 4. This is a minor point, but can the devstack-plugin-nfs repo be moved
> > back into the 'openstack' namespace?
> If this is usable plugin for nfs testing (I am not aware if we have any other) then
> it make sense to bring it to openstack governance.
> Same question here, do you want to put this under Cinder governance or QA.
Same here, I think QA should "own" the repo, but Cinder will have
permission to make changes there.
> Those plugins under QA governance also ok for me with your proposal of calloborative maintainance by
> devstack-core and cinder-core.
Thanks for the quick response!
> > Let us know which of these proposals you find acceptable.
> >  https://opendev.org/openstack/devstack-plugin-ceph
> >  https://opendev.org/x/devstack-plugin-nfs
> >  https://blueprints.launchpad.net/cinder/+spec/support-volume-local-cache
More information about the openstack-discuss