| Description | Documented by | Comments / Follow-up | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Simplify documentation tracking table | Planned for Istanbul | |
| 2 | Track repositories not documents in the document tracking table | Planned for Istanbul | |
| 3 | Create separation between completion of code reviews and container delivery by adding another milestone | M3 tasks moved to M4. Need to discuss tasks for M3. Planned for Istanbul | |
| 4 | Reconsider time between RCs. One week seems too tight. | Only plan a single RC, beginning with Istanbul | |
| 5 | Reconsider RCs altogether. What do they contribute? Are they necessary? (Kenny) | Only plan a single RC, beginning with Istanbul | |
| 6 | Better tracking of OOM / integration status. Gerrit filter that Krzysztof created was helpful. | Needs more discussion. Possible for Istanbul. | |
| 7 | xtesting dockers (tests) and xtesting-onap (test launchers) should have been frozen before RC0..so next time we have to think to that..Integration shall guarantee a stable testing baseline to OOM to gate confortably. (Morgan https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/7653) | Needs more discussion. Possible for Istanbul. | |
| 8 | Create JIRA Management Tasks for Sign-Off (OOM, Integration and Doc)? | Catherine Lefevre | Needs more discussion. Possible for Istanbul. |
| 9 | Strong pushback on Project Patch Acceptance page. Confusing? Redundant? Should we remove. | David McBride | Removed for Istanbul. |
| 10 | Requirements should be completed on time. Need more schedule discipline. Milestones missed should defer requirements to next release. | ||
| 11 | Need a better defined schedule for maintenance releases. | David McBride : should define a process before we define a schedule. |
Overview
Content Tools