Hi, First of all, apologies for late response to this as I've been out for a while.
As I mentioned during the TSC call last week, what I see on the proposal is that it - mainly focuses on technical aspects of the proposed sync solution by creation of a new project for LF RE Team on OPNFV Jira and enabling the sync of this project to LF Jira - skips the details of what type of issues should be logged to this new project - has possibility to create confusion while creating tickets - ignores the established way of working with Infra Jira project Here is the list of places and type of issues that are logged/tracked on them. - OPNFV Helpdesk: General LF IT related issues that are handled by LF RE Team. (Jenkins, slaves, artifact repository, gerrit/git, etc.) - Infra project on OPNFV Jira: None-project related requests to OPNFV Infra - Releng project on OPNFV Jira: Releng project work. - Pharos project on OPNFV Jira: Pharos project work. Here are the questions/concerns/comments, - As highlighted above, it is unclear what type of issues are expected to be logged to the newly proposed project on Jira. - Will this new proposed solution replace Helpdesk when it comes to Jenkins, slaves, artifact repository etc. that are currently handled by LF RE Team by sending mails to OPNFV Helpdesk? - OPNFV Infra WG continuously works with OPNFV Infra Jira project and assigns issues to the right people, asks status to ticket creators/assignees to keep the status of the tickets up to date as it is nearly impossible for everyone to know who the issue should be assigned to. Rather than adding yet another project and asking community to try to guess/pick one of the 5 places to log the issue, keeping the established way of working might be more practical and less confusing. Just to make it clear that we have been asking for more visibility to the tickets community submits to helpdesk for nearly 2 years so I fully support the initiative to make things more visible but only if the responsibilities are clearly defined (as the LF RE team members are also project committers and some of the items in LF RE backlog overlaps with OPNFV Releng project work) and the community is informed with the possible impacts to the current way of working. /Fatih On 28 July 2017 at 07:01, Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > All, > > For those of you who attended the Infra WG call on the 24th, you'll > remember that we weren't able to do the Jira sync demo due to GTM issues. > Andy recorded the demo and you can find this under the agenda item from the > 24th in the Infra WG meetings page > <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Infra+Working+Group> (see "Jira sync > proposals...."). Demo links can be found on slide 6 & 8. > > Please take a look and let me/Andy/Brandy know if you have any questions > or feedback. > > Thanks, > > Ray > > _______________________________________________ > infra-wg mailing list > infra...@lists.opnfv.org > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/infra-wg > >
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
