[opnfv-tech-discuss] [onosfw] ONOSFW Meeting Minutes from 9/30/2015
ashlee at onosfw.com
Fri Oct 2 14:17:57 UTC 2015
Attendees: Ashlee Young, Brian O'Connor, Prakash Ramchandran
1. OPNFV possible changes that might impact what constitutes an active user
2. Gerrit at OPNFV vs. Github
3. Patch management
**Item #1**: we discussed the current TSC discussion regarding the election processes proposal and the desire to open up the community involvement to more than just committers. The notion of broader community involvement is always well received. However, we also discussed concern for a possible transition from "all committers" being able to vote vs. "active contributors". The current criteria is objective-- all is all. But if we go down the path of trying assess who's "active", where would that responsibility lie? And what would the metric be? We had no conclusion with respect to this other than that we would continue to monitor this development.
**Item #2**: When we first established our repository, we did so because we knew we were going to create and maintain patches to various upstream projects. We also knew we were going to create new code. At the time, this practice was not well received within OPNFV, for various reasons. So we created our repository in Github and establish our primary flow as push to github before pushing to gerrit.
Right now, as we've reached a certain velocity, along with a more receptive climate for maintaining code. As such, we discussed changing our flow and going to gerrit first. We still have to investigate the best way. We also have to get all of our committers proper access in gerrit. This highlighted an issue between our recognized committers and those recognized by OPNFV. While we held elections for our committers via email, we did so on our own servers vs. the opnfv-tech-discuss at opnfv.org list. First of all, this was done as an oversight. We knew the OPNFV policy called for a majority vote of the committers. But we didn't realize there was also a mailing list procedure. Most of our community monitors what goes on in our project via direct email addresses or via our onosfw.com lists (i.e.., committers and contributors). In fact, most of our community doesn't subscribe to the opnfv-tech-discuss list. While we will not abandon the use of our email lists and other tools, we will modify our processes to post such future elections in full compliance with OPNFV guidelines.
Related to this last subject, I've been having ongoing conversations with Ray Paik, Chris Price, and Ulrich Kleber regarding the OPNFV recognition of our committers. Chris has offered to take this matter to the TSC. Numerous questions have been raised regarding governance. As a project that sits upstream to OPNFV, we are capable of having our own governance. With that said, we have no such other governance. Our governance is identical to the OPNFV governance. We have certain operational differences that include the use of non-member/non-LF funded lab resources. And we continue to grow our non-member community participants. We also do not agree with a private gerrit repository or bug tracking that requires an account for public access. For this reason, we will continue to have our own public tools.
**Item #3**: We have begun receiving "changes" to ONOS upstream code. Some of this is to the core and some to existing apps. We are receiving whole files without any notion of the original files. Hence we cannot create a reliable patch. We need developers to provide their own patches or provide the original files with their changes. And we need to consider creating new apps vs. modifying upstream apps-- whenever possible.
**Item #4**: On Tuesday, I had a conversation with Tim Kexue regarding training. And before the committer issue arose, I said I would put together training material for how we want to manage our repos and our desired operational flow for all contributors/committers. Needless to say, I've gotten a little busy, but will put such materials together once we have resolved things and our committers are able to access gerrit. I will make these materials publicly available on the discussion forum.
And finally, despite numerous changes to our meeting time, Tim has asked if we could make one more adjustment to Tuesdays at 7:30pm PT. The current time slot is difficult because people in China aren't at the office yet.
More information about the opnfv-tech-discuss