Hello, On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 7:44 PM, Ghanshyam Mann <ghanshyamm...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 12:41 AM, Andrea Frittoli > <andrea.fritt...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:33 PM Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> Andrea Frittoli wrote: >>> > [...] >>> > during the last summit in Sydney we discussed the possibility of >>> > creating an >>> > OpenStack quality assurance special interest group (OpenStack QA SIG). >>> > The proposal was discussed during the QA feedback session [0] and it >>> > received >>> > positive feedback there; I would like to bring now the proposal to a >>> > larger >>> > audience via the SIG, dev and operators mailing lists. >>> > [...] > > Yea, This will greatly help QA team to get more interest from > downstream QA teams and sharing > of QA practice, scenarios & tools. I am happy to volunteer for this effort. > >>> >>> I think this goes with the current trends of re-centering upstream >>> "project teams" on the production of software, while using SIGs as >>> communities of practice (beyond the governance boundaries), even if they >>> happen to produce (some) software as the result of their work. >>> >>> One question I have is whether we'd need to keep the "QA" project team >>> at all. Personally I think it would create confusion to keep it around, >>> for no gain. SIGs code contributors get voting rights for the TC anyway, >>> and SIGs are free to ask for space at the PTG... so there is really no >>> reason (imho) to keep a "QA" project team in parallel to the SIG ? >> >> >> That is a possibility indeed, but I think co-existance will be the case for >> a >> bit at least - we may decide to drop the QA program eventually depending >> on how the experience with the SIG goes. > > Yea, we can think of merging both based on progress and how this SIG > provide us the practical benefits. Probably this idea might solve less > contributors issue where more people from downstream start > participating in QA but as of now I cannot say anything on this. > > In current situation, it will be difficult to not have QA project > team. QA has around 15 projects > and few of active projects like Tempest, Devstack, Grenade, Patrole, > O-H need dedicated team to > maintain and implement them. Grouping them under single SIG will be > another challenge to get a dedicated > attention to them. > > Currently I see the proposed QA SIG as a common platform for different > entity like OpenStack upstream, downstream QA and > other community like opnfv etc. to share best practice, tooling etc. > For example, opnfv shown much interest in on-ongoing OpenStack > "extreme testing" and this SIG can play important role to > shape this project in good/efficient direction. But we need a > dedicated set of people to lead/implement it. > > Another point/idea is to consider and run this QA SIG as one of the > effort under QA program along with project team which can be lead by > common leader(QA PTL) to make sure both > effort goes in smooth and syncing way. >
Thanks Andreaf for starting it. I am happy to help. It is a great idea to bring more people under QA as well as help to share best practices and tools with in OpenStack community. I have one query, Are we also planning to collaborate with other communities like Ansible, K8s and others for the same? Thanks, Chandan Kumar __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev