[Openstack-sigs] [meta] SIG for life-cycle management

Adam Spiers aspiers at suse.com
Wed Sep 20 16:07:10 UTC 2017

Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com <Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com> wrote:
>There were multiple discussions at Queens PTG on creating a SIG for deployment and for upgrade.
>There was a talk on doing only one SIG that will handle full life-cycle solution support with deployment, update/patching and upgrade. The last also includes "Fast Forward" upgrade that drives thru multiple release upgrades.
>Where do we stand with it?

I talked to several people from different companies who were all in
favour of this, especially in preference to creating two separate SIGs
for deployment and upgrade, which would be a somewhat artificial split
and would cause some obvious problems, e.g. discussions on config
files would obviously need to span both deployment and upgrade.

So +1 from me.  Hopefully others can chip in.

Would it be worth formalizing the process for voting on the creation
of new SIGs?  As you will have seen from my other mail to this list
today, I've created a Google Form for collating votes and other
feedback on creation of a self-healing SIG, but another way would be
to set up (say) a sigs/ subdirectory in the governance repo and then
use gerrit to vote on adding files to it, one file per SIG.  TBH this
would make a lot more sense to me.

More information about the openstack-sigs mailing list