On 3/22/16, 2:15 AM, "Thierry Carrez" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Steven Dake (stdake) wrote: >> Technical Committee, >> >> Please accept my proposal of a new type of project called a deployment >> [1]. If people don¹t like the type name, we can change it. The basic >> idea is there are a class of projects unrepresented by type:service and >> type:library which are deployment projects including but not limited to >> Fuel, Kolla, OSA, and TripleO. The main motivation behind this addition >> are: >> >> 1. Make it known to all which projects are deployment projects in the >> governance repository. >> 2. Provide that information via the governance website under release >> management tags. >> 3. Permit deployment projects to take part in the assert tags relating >> to upgrades [2]. >> >> >> Currently fuel is listed as a type:service in the governance repository >> which is only partially accurate. It may provide a ReST API, but during >> the Kolla big tent application process, we were told we couldn't use >> type:service as it only applied to daemon services and not deployment >> projects. > >I agree that type:service is not really a good match for Fuel or Kolla, >and we could definitely use something else -- that would make it a lot >clearer what is what for the downstream consumers of the software we >produce. > >One issue is that tags are applied to deliverables, not project teams. >For the Fuel team it's pretty clear (it would apply to their "fuel" >deliverable). For Kolla team, I suspect it would apply to the "kolla" >deliverable. But the TripleO team produces a collection of tools, so >it's unclear which of those would be considered the main "deployment" >thing. > >For OSA, we don't produce the deployment tool, only a set of playbooks. >I was thinking we might need a type:packaging tag to describe which >things we produce are just about packaging OpenStack things for usage by >outside deployment systems (Ansible, Puppet, Chef, Deb, RPM...). So I'm >not sure your type:deployment tag would apply to OSA. Thierry, I was focused on Kolla when I proposed the type:deployment tag. I can also add a type:packaging tag as well if the community would find that helpful for deb/rpm packaging efforts. I agree type:packaging doesn't fit with deployment tools in general. I hadn't considered Puppet and Chef in my original proposal, but I think they do fit into the type:deployment tag, because they deploy the compute-kit. Relating to OSA, OSA produces full playbooks and other tools for deployment, so I think it is more a deployment system then a packaging system. > >-- >Thierry Carrez (ttx) > >__________________________________________________________________________ >OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe >http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
