Hi Al,
What is the best format to provide feedback on the wiki [0]?
Some topics may require a lot more than what can fit in a table cell and likely
would benefit from more interactive discussion between OPNFV and CNTT teams
(technical level, not organizational as this seems to be what is happening most
at this time). Collaboration methods that are friendly to multi-TZ are
preferred.
Trying to get up to speed, one general question as it is not clear from the
wiki, these requirements seem to be focused on openstack and VMs, but I also
see occasional mention of k8s, can we clarify the exact scope of this wiki? It
is understandable to try to cover everything (openstack + k8s) but it is
already challenging to just cover openstack properly, adding k8s to the
discussion is going to be even more challenging to get something
concrete/actionable in a reasonable time.
Thanks
Alec
From: <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> on behalf of Al Morton <a...@research.att.com>
Date: Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 9:59 AM
To: 'opnfv-tech-discuss' <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>,
opnfv-project-leads <opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org>
Cc: "opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org" <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>, Jim Baker
<jba...@linuxfoundation.org>, "David McBride (dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org)"
<dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: [opnfv-tsc] Jerma Release Meeting: Requirements Working Group
OPNFV PTLs,
During David's Tuesday Release Meeting (right after the TSC meeting), we plan
to use some of the agenda time to cover CNTT BALDY Release Requirements vetting.
Please Join the Release Meeting to discuss! <<<<
Our progress will be captured on the JERMA Release wiki, in a dedicated page
[0].
I worked through about half of the 150 requirements again yesterday.
In general, it would be better if the requirement wording anticipated more
specific action by the Reference Implementation projects, or the projects
contributing to the Reference Conformance Testing. I view the current
requirement wording as more directed to vendors ("the architecture must allow
for..."), while alternative wording could help testers and accomplish the same
goals ("Test that the API can instantiate one or more VMs, <details>.") Similar
for Ref Implementation...
As I said many times, we will need to engage the CNTT WS leaders and give them
direct feedback that they can implement in their documentation. We also need
CNTT WS Leader dialog on requirement priority, stakeholder support levels, and
release scheduling.
thanks,
Al
[0] https://wiki.opnfv.org/x/wAVbAw
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#24313):
https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/24313
Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/76243627/21656
Group Owner: opnfv-tech-discuss+ow...@lists.opnfv.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
