Hi, Functest Jerma has been released 10/14/19. https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tsc/message/5636
Functest has already been updated to take CNTT Baraque requirements into account. Of course Functest will be continuously synced with RA1 via all RA1 meetings if any API capability switches to optional or mandatory. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/cntt-baraque-road-openstack-train-c%25C3%25A9dric-ollivier/ Here are calls for contributors suggesting a couple of RC1 enhancements via Functest if companies are interested to contribute. (be free to contact me for any code contribution to Functest for the success of CNTT) https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/call-functest-cntt-rc1-contributions-c%C3%A9dric-ollivier/ https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/24134 As Functest is fully integrated in RC1, the main target is about adding the existing test cases in RC2. The overall task is currently more on CNTT side (e.g. test case description and selection) Cédric De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] De la part de David McBride Envoyé : lundi 17 août 2020 18:54 À : Alec Hothan (ahothan) <[email protected]>; Georg Kunz <[email protected]> Cc : Al Morton <[email protected]>; opnfv-tech-discuss <[email protected]>; opnfv-project-leads <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Jim Baker <[email protected]> Objet : Re: [opnfv-tsc] Jerma Release Meeting: Requirements Working Group Hi Alec, I think that the best approach is to attend the release meeting on Tuesday. Initially, we will be addressing the scope of CNTT requirements that we want to take on for OPNFV Jerma. Subsequently, we will dig into the details of the requirements. Also, note that @Georg Kunz<mailto:[email protected]> has created a new project called Kuberef that seeks to develop a kubernetes-based RI. David On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 6:44 AM Alec Hothan (ahothan) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: 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: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Al Morton <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Sunday, August 16, 2020 at 9:59 AM To: 'opnfv-tech-discuss' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, opnfv-project-leads <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, Jim Baker <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, "David McBride ([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>)" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 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 -- David McBride Release Manager Linux Foundation Networking (LFN) Mobile: +1.805.276.8018<tel:%2B1.805.276.8018> Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> IRC: dmcbride _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#24321): https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/24321 Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/76243627/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
