Open Stack

Adam Spiers wrote:
> 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.

Yes, the long-term plan is to create a specific repository that would be
published under the governance website. We wanted the SIGs to have some
mileage first so we know what we want to track.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)