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

Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com
Wed Sep 20 16:26:45 UTC 2017

+1 from me also on forming a single SIG.

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Spiers [mailto:aspiers at suse.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 11:07 AM
To: openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Openstack-sigs] [meta] SIG for life-cycle management

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.

openstack-sigs mailing list
openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org

More information about the openstack-sigs mailing list