search

anuket-project / anuket-specifications

Anuket specifications
https://docs.anuket.io
123 stars 117 forks source link

[RI 1 Core] CIRV Repo(s) Determination #761

Closed michaelfix closed 4 years ago

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

A request has been made to create a CIRV repo, "cirv-perftest" for the containment of artifacts, tools, etc, in support of Perf Test evaluations on POD10.

Rationale for repo(s): The purpose for the repo(s) is twofold: First, utilize the repo for a centralized storage of artifacts (code, tools, descriptor templates (POD, Infra, etc), topology documents, etc), which would be considered to vital to the delivery of the CIRV project and could not easily, or be feasible, to store on Confluence/GitHub/wikis. Second, the repo(s) will be used for OPNFV Release Planning, for direct release consumption and delivery.

This issue is open to facilitate conversation, and reach consensus on the following:

  1. Do we agree to create, or establish CIRV repos at this time?
  2. Quantity?
  3. Name(s), following normalized syntax?

Recommendation is:

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

Please review and weigh in: @markshostak , @collivier , @opensource-tnbt (Sridhar), @rrajesh70

FYI, Assignees/owners: @fuqiao123 @trevgc

My (Mike F) recommendation is in the Issue Description itself. i.e. Yes, start with 1, call is cirv-perftest and stick to similar nomenclature in the future. According to an offline conversation w/ Bin Hu, we understand the CIRV project is entitled to 2 repos, by default.

tomkivlin commented 4 years ago

Hi @mf4716 does the project tag for this Issue need changing - not sure this is RA2 Core?

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

Corrected to RI1-Core. Thanks @tomkivlin , for letting me know.

markshostak commented 4 years ago

@mf4716

A request has been made to create a CIRV repo...

Can you include a rationale for the requested repo? I agree with your proposal, but we should be documenting these things, not creating them just `cause, even if we all agree it should be done.

1. Do we agree to create, or establish CIRV repos at this time?
 * Yes, create CIRV repos.

MXS> Yes, I support creating CIRV repo(s) at this time.

2. Quantity?

MXS> Quantity should be based on defendable need. BTW, who has to approve the creation of yet another repo?

3. Name(s), following normalized syntax?

MXS> Yes, definitely.

* Use syntax of "cirv-[purpose]"

MXS> Um, "cirv.", I'm good, but I'm thinking we may need another qualifier to scope the repo (see below).

* Start with one repo, "cirv-perftest"

I can't tell from this name, if the object under test is the VNF or the NFVI. The subject is applicable to both, but the tools in the repo would likely be much different (i.e. complementary/opposite).

So, perhaps "cirv.vnf.perftest" if the tool will exercise the candidate VNFs, and "cirv.nfvi.perftest" if the tool will exercise the NFVI. Also, this assumes the repos all pertain to the "V" in cirv. If the repo contents pertains to the "I" in cirv, "cirv.ri-x.[purpose]", where x reflects the relevant RA.

Here's an additional question for your list: Who will be designated to administrate, or at least approve/merge updates to any given repo? My recommendation: A) person requesting repo, B) CIRV PTL, C) variable delegate.

Note: I prefer "." as the delimiter, so we can use "-x" to identify variants (e.g., RI-1, RI-2, etc.), assuming the repo platform allows these characters in repo names.

HTH, -Mark

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

@markshostak - the description has been updated to include Rationale. Regarding approval, I was informed we request approval from the OPNFV TSC, with an expectation that two(2) repos can be provided. Additional repos, if needed, would require additional TSC review and discussion. I'm confirming repo-name syntax (i.e. using the "." notation), and overall admin/approver. Will revert back upon receipt of those details.

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

@markshostak - there's no particular syntax that is required that I've been told, or can find. See examples in https://git.opnfv.org/. But, ONAP uses a different style https://git.onap.org/. Unclear still who is the owner/admin of the repo, so I've asked again. Re: repo name, it makes logical sense to go with a nomenclature of, "cirv.ri-x.[purpose]", assume we can further define the purpose as nfvi, or vnf. e.g. cirv.ri-1.nfvi.perftest, or something equivalent. Thoughts?

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

@markshostak , I shared this in email offline, but Admin/owner of the repo is the Linux Foundation. Creating directories, changes, file uploads/mgmt, etc, is done by contributors, reviewed by contributors including committers, and approved and merged by committers. For CIRV, this would be @fuqiao123 (Fu Ciao), and myself.

@trevgc Trevor, @fuqiao123 Fu Qiao, are you okay with "cirv.ri-01.perftest" as the first repo? If not, please recommend an alternative(s).

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

status?

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

@lylavoie (Lincoln), per the RI/RC status call, here's the open Issue re: where to Park CIRV tools/code, and recommended syntax for folder/file names. Please review at your next opportunity. I'll include a link in our 1/22 meeting minutes for RI/RC.

lylavoie commented 4 years ago

I would propose we request the following one repo ("cirv"). Inside the repo we will separate materials via directories, as "intel-pod-10-nfiv-perfest" or "hdv-tooling", "manifest-tooling". Folders can easily be changed, discussed, and maintained by the PTL and committers. Repo creation comes through TSC for the project, which in this case is cirv. The request to OPNFV TSC should come from the PTL.

@mf4716 I believe you are one of the PTLs for CIRV, can you make the ask to OPNFV TSC to approve the creation of the repo.

The Wiki page (https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=47284396) should also be updated to list the PTL and in the OPNFV project, we should have a few more committers, responsible for review and merging, if there are trusted volunteers, you should nominate them to be put to that status.

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

I've emailed the OPNFV TSC (1/22/2020), requesting creation of a "CIRV" repo. Awaiting disposition.

The CIRV project has the designated PTL listed.

I will send an email to the list of project contributors, with a nomination of a few trusted volunteers.

michaelfix commented 4 years ago

Closing. Two repo's created, and documented on the CIRV project page.

  1. CIRV: https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/admin/repos/cirv - main(primary) repo
  2. CIRV_Spirent: https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/admin/repos/cirv-spirent - adjunct repo, dedicated to Spirent, used for uploading/managing code contributions for RI/RC validations in direct support of CNTT