[Openstack-sigs] [self-healing] Storyboard for tracking SIG actions?
aspiers at suse.com
Fri Dec 1 18:02:17 UTC 2017
Thanks Tim, I like that idea! It would allow all sig repositories to
be viewed via the following URL:
Tim Bell <Tim.Bell at cern.ch> wrote:
>Using a repo name which is consistent with the mailing list tag is also nice, so something like
>sig at the beginning would also set the name space cleanly for the future (e.g. sig-scientific, sig-product, …)
>From: Mike Perez <thingee at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: "openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org" <openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org>
>Date: Friday, 1 December 2017 at 18:01
>To: "openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org" <openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org>
>Subject: Re: [Openstack-sigs] [self-healing] Storyboard for tracking SIG actions?
> On 16:43 Dec 01, Adam Spiers wrote:
> > Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
> > >On 2017-11-29 09:23:42 +0000 (+0000), Adam Spiers wrote:
> > >[...]
> > >>that could be solved by changing the approach to require the repo
> > >>to exist, even if it's empty and unused.
> > >[...]
> > >>Currently the wiki is probably good enough, but it certainly
> > >>wouldn't do any harm to have a Git repo, and it's not even
> > >>unlikely that we will need one in the future.
> > >[...]
> > >
> > >This has basically been the conclusion in each past discussion where
> > >the topic has arisen. So, with that out of the way, do you have any
> > >idea what you would want the (for now empty/unused) repository
> > >called? I'm happy to submit the change to create that and the
> > >accompanying SB project for you.
> > That's very kind, thanks! I guess either "openstack-self-healing" or
> > "openstack-self-healing-sig" should be fine, unless anyone else has
> > any ideas? In case it's a relevant data point, I was planning to
> > create an #openstack-self-healing IRC channel, so maybe consistency
> > between the names makes sense.
> > Of course, if the "openstack-" prefix is redundant then we
> > can drop that; would this repository be going under the "openstack/"
> > namespace anyway? I'm assuming my previous suggestion of creating a new
> > "openstack-sig/" namespace probably doesn't make sense, for good
> > reasons I am not yet aware of.
> +1 openstack- prefix is redundant.
> Mike Perez (thingee)
>openstack-sigs mailing list
>openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org
More information about the openstack-sigs