All this looks good to me, ty so much for organizing. I left 1 inline
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 3:23 PM, Austin Macdonald <aus...@redhat.com> wrote:
> David and I went through all the pulpcore issues that have the "Pulp3 MVP"
> We added this one to the sprint:
> - https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3545
> These two need to be updated before we can move forward:
> - @dalley https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3505
> - @asmacdo https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3546
> We marked these as groomed, unless someone says "no", I plan to add all of
> these to the sprint.
> - https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3082
> - https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3081
> - https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3220
> - https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3298
> - https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3395
> We have some vagrant/ansible issues. I don't think these really belong in
> the "Pulp" project tracker. Mind if we move them to the "Infrastructure"
> project? (BTW, there are a lot more, just without the MVP tag).
> - https://pulp.plan.io/issues/3439
> - https://pulp.plan.io/issues/2922
> I'm hoping to continue the "Infrastructure" Redmine project for things
like website hosting. I see what you mean though because it will be
developed and released separately. I think we're in a similar situation for
3 things: the ansible installer, the migration tool, and CLI, and for each
of them we should either make their own Redmine projects or a tag under
Pulp. We already have many Redmine projects and they are kind of a pain so
I want to float a tags based approach for feedback. Perhaps keeping them
out of "Pulp" means that we remove all the existing tags from them and tag
them with new tags like 'Ansible Installer', '2to3 Migration' and 'CLI'?
> Pulp-dev mailing list
Pulp-dev mailing list