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

Thierry Carrez thierry at openstack.org
Thu Sep 21 08:02:40 UTC 2017

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)

More information about the openstack-sigs mailing list