Versions Compared

Old Version 50

changes.mady.by.user David McBride

Saved on

compared with

New Version 51

changes.mady.by.user Kenny Paul

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

These meetings were initiated in response to ongoing discussions in the TSC and PTL meetings about dealing with dependencies on unmaintained projects, as well as documentation.

Meeting Minutes

August 15, 2022

Attendees: David McBride  , Andreas Geissler     , Thomas Kulik , Amy Zwarico , Byung-Woo Jun   , Tony Hansen , Kenny Paul 

  • If a project is not participating in a release, can they CLOSE - won't do, or defer to the next release?
    • Team feels that projects should continue to support unmaintained repo activities / information gathering, even if they are not participating in the release
    • Need an escalation process
    • Kenny Paul suggests that RM should escalate

August 8, 2022

Attendees: David McBride  , Andreas Geissler  , Thomas Kulik , Amy Zwarico , Byung-Woo Jun   , Tony Hansen , Kenny Paul 

  • Feedback

July 25, 2022

Attendees: David McBride  , Andreas Geissler  , Thomas Kulik , Amy Zwarico , Byung-Woo Jun , Muddasar Ahmed , Pawel Pawlak , Tony Hansen 

  • Feedback from Fiachra on status of version evolution tool:  The Linux Foundation Mail - status of version evolution tool?.pdf
  • Andreas reports that version evolution tool has been activated on DT.  Example.
  • What does it mean when a project does not participate in a release?
    • What if the project has required changes?
    • If there is a change to the project, are they still subject to release management tasks?
    • Can we define a minimal participation for a release (i.e., bug fixes only + support tasks)

July 18, 2022

Attendees: David McBride  , Andreas Geissler  , Thomas Kulik , Thomas Kulik , Amy Zwarico , Byung-Woo Jun , Muddasar Ahmed 

June 27, 2022

Attendees: David McBride  , Tony Hansen , Thomas Kulik , Thomas Kulik , Muddasar Ahmed 

  • Status of docker version evolution tool?  Are there still issues?
  • Repo.yaml
    • Use as a reference for status of every repo ("single source of truth")
      • For example, documenting the status of repos and projects in ONAP documentation
    • Process?
      • Use a release management task at M1 or M2 for PTLs to review repos.yaml and update as needed
      • Need a process for projects that dissolve and where the PTL and committers are unavailable
    • Format
      • still an open question
      • use yaml?
      • enumeration of states?
      • file validation?
    • Need to align changes to repos.yaml file with process flow document

May 30, 2022

Canceled due to Memorial Day holiday

May 23, 2022

Attendees: David McBride  , Tony Hansen , Timo Perala , Pawel Pawlak 

  • Tony suggests that we re-visit the need and the purpose for the repos yaml file to determine how it fits into the archiving work flow that Amy has been presenting the past few weeks.
    • Agenda item for June 6
  • Meeting ended early due to light attendance
  • Meeting canceled next week (May 30) due to the Memorial Day holiday

May 16, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Amy Zwarico , Muddasar Ahmed  , Fiachra Corcoran , Maggie C, Andreas Geissler , Tony Hansen , Robert Heinemann 

  • Amy to present unmaintained project process document to the TSC this week
  • Docker Version Evolution tool
    • Appears that there may still be some errors.  Fiachra will investigate.
    • May not be showing every docker image.  Only shows images that are deployed by default.
    • Fiachra Corcoran to check what contrib components can be disabled for daily/prod deployment
  • Amy suggests that we identify a subset of repos, using the gray filter in the docker version tool, to resolve for the Kohn release
  • Do we want to pursue projects (e.g., portal) or components or both?
  • Tool evaluates to N-2 (includes maintenance releases).  Is that sufficient?
    • Consensus is that N-2 is fine for now.
  • Amy to propose some components for evaluation in the Kohn release, using the list generated by the docker version tool (gray filter)
  • Repos identified by grey filter should be discussed with projects during arch review
    • If still required, why has no technical debt been retired?
    • If not required, then retire the repo
    • Invite Chakar next week to discuss

May 2, 2022

Meeting canceled.

Apr 25, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Amy Zwarico , Muddasar Ahmed  , Fiachra Corcoran , Pawel Pawlak, Maggie C, Thomas Kulik, Tony Hansen  

  • Archive process flow will be presented in today's PTL meeting (Amy)
    • See latest version attached to today's PTL meeting agenda
  • Unmaintained project dependency tracking using Global Requirements will be presented in today's PTL meeting (David)
  • Suggestion from Maggie to use color coding from slide in the documentation
  • Re-confirmed with team to pursue GRs for Portal and AAF with Portal being completed in the Kohn release, and AAF in the London release.
  • Meeting canceled next week

Apr 18, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Amy Zwarico , Muddasar Ahmed  

  • Amy Zwarico shares slide describing process flow leading to deprecation (archived) for different starting conditions.
    • View file
      name22_04_18_ONAPUnmaintainedProjects.pdf
      height150
  • Muddasar Ahmed : https://wiki.onap.org/x/Pw_LBQ
  • Follow up on actions:
    • TSC meeting was canceled last week, so unable to request exception to GR process
    • Thomas sent email to LFIT and followed up with meeting.
      • We will discuss the outcome of the meeting next week.

Apr 11, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Amy Zwarico , Muddasar Ahmed   , Fiachra Corcoran , Pawel Pawlak, Maggie C, Thomas Kulik , Andreas Geissler 

...

  •  Thomas Kulik send email to LFIT to begin the discussion about using repos.yaml to automate processes for repositories. Follow up discussion in this meeting, or the PTL meeting (standing LFIT agenda item).

Apr 4, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Thomas Kulik   , Amy Zwarico , Muddasar Ahmed   , Fiachra Corcoran, Tony Hansen , Pawel Pawlak, Kenny Paul ,  Maggie C, Timo Perala 

...

  • repo.yaml and schema
    • No progress with schema
    • Should we move forward with repo.yaml file without a schema

Mar 28, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Thomas Kulik   , Amy Zwarico , Muddasar Ahmed   , Cedric Ollivier, Fiachra Corcoran, Tony Hansen , Pawel Pawlak

  • Gerrit:  https://gerrit.onap.org/r/c/relman/+/127959
  • Is "unmaintained" a project level, or a repo level, attribute?
  • Should we add another lifecycle state, "Closed"
    • Active (i.e., incubation, mature, core):  currently maintained and included in release
    • Unmaintained:  no longer active, but still part of a release.
      • Not a persistent state.  
      • Should be moving toward Closed  by removing dependencies.
    • Closed: no longer part of a release

Mar 21, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Thomas Kulik   , Amy Zwarico , Muddasar Ahmed   , Cedric Ollivier, Fiachra Corcoran, Tony Hansen  

  • New repo (relman) created.
  • Next steps?
  • Thomas is working on the repos.yaml file, as well as a schema for validation.
  • What's the process when we need to branch an unmaintained project (i.e., in the case where there are dependencies on the unmaintained project)
    • One option:  create list of unmaintained projects that must be branched and submit as a ticket to IT
    • Another option:  relman committers have rights to branch unmaintained projects
  • Cedric advises that Jenkins jobs should be updated and/or removed as projects are removed from the release.  Removing them later can be difficult and tedious.
  • Present slide deck to PTLs on Mar 28
    • Fiachra Corcoran suggests AAF as a trial
    • Tracking:
      • Use Best Practice / Global Requirement process as a parent ticket with child tickets for reach project with a dependency

Mar 7, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Thomas Kulik , Tony Hansen  , Amy Zwarico , Muddasar Ahmed , Kenny Paul , Robert Heinemann , Cedric Ollivier 

...

  • No meeting next week due to DTF Workshop event
  • Adjust time to two hours earlier due to DST shift of PTL meeting. (i.e., 6 a.m. Pacific)

Feb 28, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Thomas Kulik , Tony Hansen  , Amy Zwarico 

  • TSC approved creation of a new repo without the need for a formal project
  • Question:  is yaml the best format, or should we use something else (json, xml)?
    • consistent with other config files

Feb 14, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Kenny Paul  , Thomas Kulik , Tony Hansen  , Amy Zwarico 

  • Plan for creating new repo to contain repo status file
    • Request exception from TSC to create new repo without creating a new project
    • Could be useful for other artifacts, such as release management Jira task generation
    • Should we use GitLab?
    • Repo name?  How about "relman" or "rel-man"? Or "release-management" (like the already existing "ci-management" repo)?
  • Thomas Kulik has proposal for file configuration (a very first draft: repos.yaml).
    • Avoid repeating information found in the info.yaml file
    • Should we capture project association?  The project association for most repos can be identified by the path name.  However, some (e.g., "oparent" belongs to INT) are not obvious.

Feb 7, 2022

Attendees: David McBride , Kenny Paul , Fiachra Corcoran , Thomas Kulik , Eric Debeau , Tony Hansen , Cedric Ollivier , Amy Zwarico 

...

Jan 31, 2022

Attendees: David, Kenny, Fiachra, Amy, Thomas, Eric, Pawel, Timo, Tony

...

  • Eric reports that the REST call scanning tool may work well at the project level, but there is not enough information to identify dependencies to the repo level.
  • Fiachra says that there are also some Kubernetes tools that might be useful (https://learnk8s.io/visualise-dependencies-kubernetes).
  • Cedric Ollivier suggests maintaining a text file in git that documents the status of all repos used by the project
    • This would be one file for all projects
    • Use a structured markup.  YAML?
    • PTLs would update as a release management task.  Probably at M1.

Jan 24, 2022

Attendees: David, Muddasar, Amy, Thomas, Tony, Kenny, Eric, Cedric

  • Re-cap from Dec 13 - discussion
  • Thomas says that we should start with dependencies at the project level, since we don't have an obvious way to get repo level dependencies
  • Eric made an attempt to create a dependency graph.
    • Very complex and time consuming manual operation! However, we believe that relationships are stable, so this may be worthwhile.
    • Note that some dependencies are optional; however, the map does not currently differentiate between optional and required.
  • Cedric suggests an alternative, automated way to identify dependencies:  develop script to analyze code and detect REST calls
    • Eric / Cedric to test with one or two components and report back to this meeting (next week?)
  • What might process look like? (tentative)
    1. Release management task:  PTLs review JSON file and make updates to dependencies
      1. This would be a pre-requisite to the architectural review between M1 and M2
    2. Run dependency tool to create map
    3. Review map against unmaintained projects list
      1. Who would do this? 
        1. PTL / arch subcommittee 
      2. Create Jira ticket to identify and track dependency?
    4. Start countdown clock for projects to remove dependency
      1. TSC must decide policy on how quickly dependencies must be resolved
        1. Strict:  no release with dependencies
        2. Flexible:  dependencies resolved over 2 or more releases

Dec 13, 2021

Attendees:  David, Pawel, Tony, Chaker, Thomas, Kenny

  • David McBride asks Chaker Al-Hakim to describe how the Arch Subcommittee works with project dependencies
  • Chaker says that dependencies are tracked at the project level, not the repo level.
  • Need to map dependencies to the repo level
    • Example:  DMAAP archived a repo, but the project is still active.  What if active projects have a dependency on the repo that was archived?
  • Chaker shares the review template with a new section that asks about dependencies.
    • Thomas Kulik suggests that "critical dependencies" should be replaced by "dependencies".
  • Chaker believes that mapping dependencies between projects at the repo level is outside of the scope of the architectural review.
  • Need to understand both build dependencies and functional dependencies.
  • Kenny:  Force updates by removing unmaintained projects from OOM.  
    • Build failures and test failures will highlight dependencies.

Dec 6, 2021

Attendees:  David, Kenny, Amy, Andreas, Muddasar, Pawel, Tony, Cedric

...

  •  David McBride ask Chaker to attend next week's meeting to discuss arch subcommittee and unmaintained project dependencies

Nov 29, 2021

Attendees:  David, Kenny, Amy, Cedric, Thomas

...