Another item might be rethinking the ORT/cron way of updating cache
configuration.

Might also be a good idea to list abbrevs used in that document --
we're all used to using TO, ORT, TC, TR, etc,  but a newbie wouldn't
be..

-dan

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Durfey, Ryan <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks for getting this going Jeremy!
>
> I would love to have a prioritized list of major ongoing efforts for each 
> component with maybe a few sub-bullets (example below).  It might also be 
> nice to be able to link these to wiki pages and/or feature requests in Github.
>
> Traffic Ops
>
>   *   Self-Service
>
>      *   Configuration management overhaul for discrete changes per service
>      *   Access control improvements for roles, capabilities, and API end 
> points
>      *   API end point creation for additional functionality
>
> Ryan Durfey    M | 303-524-5099
> CDN Support (24x7): 866-405-2993 or 
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
>
>
> From: Jeremy Mitchell <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: "[email protected]" 
> <[email protected]>
> Date: Thursday, November 30, 2017 at 11:47 AM
> To: "[email protected]" 
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: VISION.md
>
> At Comcast, we've discussed the need for a document that outlines the
> short/long-term goals of TC. Rather than calling this a roadmap which
> implies time/deadlines, we thought VISION.md might be appropriate.
>
> I imagine VISION.md will contain (for now) a simple, bulleted list of goals
> such as:
>
> - Traffic Portal feature parity with TO UI
> - Deprecation of the TO UI (and the associated UI namespace/routes)
> - Enhanced TO Roles/Capabilities
> - TO/TP Self-Service
> - TO API Golang Rewrite
> - Cache Agnostification
> - etc
>
> Maybe we just start with a bulleted list and later a short description can
> be added to each item.
>
> What else can I add to this list? Also, I envision this is a living
> document that everyone can contribute to via PRs (as long as the larger
> group agrees that the addition is inline with the overall vision of TC).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Jeremy
>

Reply via email to