- Amsterdam doc project branch created and tracking updates in any other repo providing documentation that has an Amsterdam branch. For those that did not have an Amsterdam branch, we are using head of the master branch as of ~11/24 4pm EST.
- Project repos that still need to be tagged:
- Where Amsterdam changes are expected and should be automatically published when merged, an Amsterdam branch may be created.
- Both master and amsterdam are being published at read the docs. The default when someone enter http://docs.onap.org is master and the the developer wiki download link currently points to master. Should we change this?
- Create JIRA ticket(s) for each item below Rich Bennett
- Each PTL committer for the repos list in column 2, to identify the hash and create a release branch "amsterdam".
- Sync up the doc project amsterdam branch submodule references with created amsterdam branches,
- Switch DW download link to RTD amsterdam when branches above are completed Rich Bennett
SDC and Modeling are using 1.1.0 - is this acceptable - should we just have one naming convention?
Questions to be answered whenever the TSC votes to create a named release:
- where do residual improvements go for Amsterdam
- where do major new changes go for Beijing
- when do we start merging the # 2 changes to master.
We can probably accommodate different names for (#1) and/or some delay to starting #2 as long as everyone has the same view a timeline. Is there isn’t a better way use tags, eg
- on the RC dates…. A Release Candidate tag is placed on every repo within a very short time by LF (< 1 hour),
- tests proceed using only tagged candidate versions
- If major tests fail, fix and goto the next RC (step 1)
- Declare a release from the last RC tags
- if / when any change is needed, a branch is created from the last RC tag
Topic for lessons learned at Santa Clara F2F? Gregory Glover
- Forward these issue notes to Gildas for discussion
Touch base with OpenNFV / other Open Source projects?
Create for HEAT and OOM: Ticket
Need to create sandbox for developers, SEs, architects to look at E2E system / Cross-component interactions
- How complete does the Wiki version need to be?
- Blocked by need for continuous deployment servers
- Integration Team should own (another good topic for Santa Clara F2F) Helen Chen
- Do we need something for new users (not developers) that want to understand use cases, try higher level service/policy scenarios, etc? Eric Debeau Yes, we need, cf the ONAP Beijing Undestranding: ONAP Beijing: Understanding the vFWCL use-case mechanism
Migration of existing Change-Controlled content from the wiki:
- Setting Up ONAP
- Integrating with ONAP
- Using ONAP
- Architecture
- Documenting ONAP
- Developing ONAP
Establishing other structure for
- Discussion forum
- Submitting edits / problems with existing content
- Process for doing the above
- Start with (oom kubernetes, quickstart, heat template ), set example / define a best practice for collecting/refining documentation on wiki, following a process with wiki labels, JIRA tickets, etc that keeps everyone aware of state and transition to change controlled documentation in gerrit
- What needs to change for the latest vFW instructions? Eric Debeau
Add to F2F forum topics Gregory Glover
- Developing ONAP: Structure and Headings clean-up
- "Carrier Grade" usability - what does that mean for Documentation?
- Insuring standards/consistency across projects (e.g. terminology, monitoring, clustering)
- Usability (e.g. Designer, VNF Providers, Operations)
- Differentiate:
- REST API
- HealthCheck API
- Components API (eg Java class API)
Modeling team responsible
- Definitions to RsT
- Indexing / tagging to enable Searching
Address during Release 2
Create JIRA issue - Greg follow up
How to:
- Gerrit guide
- Guidelines (Builds, etc.)
- Utilities: Jenkins, Conversion tools (e.g. LFPandocs)
(LF pursuing Quarter 3, 2018)