Hi Folks,

A quick email to sum-up the status.

Before creating the CBS accounts, we need to agree on a list of tags and how/what will be built.

Starting from the base name:

nfv6-{project}-{release} nfv7-{project}-{release}

The next step will be to define which project will be part of the NFV sig and how many release they need to build in //.

I'll send a more details email about koji workflow we put in place for cloud/virt/scl in next days but the NFV members can start to think about the deliverable they need.

TIA and have a nice weekend,

Hi Dave,`

...

The next step will be to define which project will be part of the NFV sig and how many release they need to build in //.

Is this something I need to give you? If so, I will need a little more information to understand the expectation.

We realized that having single set of tags for each SIG, is too little for most SIGs. So we need to take into account, more parameters and allow the SIG to grow and acquire new "projects".

...

nfv7-{project}-{release}

For example the cloud SIG has openstack, cloudstack, etc... (e.g: cloud7-openstack-kilo)

So the idea is to categorize what are your deliverable and define project name and if needed releases for each. Releases allow the team to work on different version at the same time (e.g : liberty, kilo , juno for openstack). We also defined some -common repositories that are shared across releases, other that are shared across the entire SIG.

Feel free to comment on the bugs.c.o for your request or here on the mailing list for general question about the workflow.

Hi,

On 01/06/15 13:11, Dave Neary wrote:

I don't know how you feel, but for OPNFV that feels like excessive overhead for the moment - is it possible to start with one or two tags, and work from there? We don't have a diversity of projects (yet), and I fear we will guess wrong with tags if we try to anticipate now for future needs.

Who can do more, can do less approach.

nfv7-opnfv-latest or nfv7-opnfv-master is fine as a single tag. it's not about the number but the modularity.

What purpose do the tags serve? How do they fit into the CentOS ecosystem in general?

It's just a way to build packages with clean buildroots and you get in bonus repositories containing all packages for development : it's quite handy.

thanks,

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

On 06/01/2015 06:54 AM, Haïkel wrote:

I agree with Thomas.

It will depend, if you want to maintain multiple releases and avoid retagging common build deps each time, you add a new release.

Moreover, some deps are quite common among products, so it makes sense to share them and have a common tag that your product tags inherits.

Looks like Thomas proposed as a start:

"nfv7-opnfv-latest or nfv7-opnfv-master is fine as a single tag. it's not about the number but the modularity."

Is that part of what you agree with Thomas about?

I think we just need a few +1s on schema from people who understand and will have to work the space; maybe Cloud * SIG members can give input too?[1]

- - Karsten [1] (Trying to solve the chicken/egg problem of new SIG needs where members are all new too.) - -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade .^\ CentOS Doer of Stuff http://TheOpenSourceWay.org \ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41

On Fri, 29 May 2015, Haïkel wrote:

Hi Joseph

try pinging alphacc (Thomas) on irc, next week. He's CBS admin.

Regards, H.

Thanks Haïkel,

Thomas actually posted a note on my ticket saying that he needs to sort out some logistics (how the work is organized, the number of projects etc), so he is preparing an email for this mailing list. So I am in stand by mode, and ready to get going as soon as we sort everything out.

Regards,

Joseph