Thank you Helen. Appreciate the leadership.
Mazin

Sent through AT&T's fastest network

On Aug 3, 2017, at 7:00 PM, Yunxia Chen 
<helen.c...@huawei.com<mailto:helen.c...@huawei.com>> wrote:

Hi, Mazin,
The Integration team will take this one as an action item: we will define a 
list, (there’s other best code practice as well, such as code review etc.).
with an implementation plan since we may not able to do everything in R1, and 
get TSC’s approval.

Regards,

Helen Chen

From: <onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> 
on behalf of "GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)" 
<ma...@research.att.com<mailto:ma...@research.att.com>>
Date: Thursday, August 3, 2017 at 8:31 AM
To: Eric Debeau <eric.deb...@orange.com<mailto:eric.deb...@orange.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Enforcing an "Upstream first" approach to ONAP

I am ok if the integration team wants to take the task of defining best code 
practices and guidelines on significant code insertion. I agree with Ash that 
code that can not be reviewed should not be committed blindly. But we need to 
form guidelines so we are all following the same practices. Even the concept of 
significant code is not defined.

This is not a trivial effort and I do not want the integration team to be 
distracted from R1, but I am open for suggestions from the TSC. Let's have the 
discussion via email. I would also appreciate links to successful code best 
practices and enforcements adopted by other forums.

Mazin

Sent through AT&T's fastest network

On Aug 3, 2017, at 11:35 AM, 
"eric.deb...@orange.com<mailto:eric.deb...@orange.com>" 
<eric.deb...@orange.com<mailto:eric.deb...@orange.com>> wrote:
+1 for raising this topic


We should avoid 10k LOC patches because it is very complex to review and is not 
aligned with an open source spirit.

I do not believe that we should create another subcommitte to handle such 
issue. The integration project may be able to detect such behavior and alerts 
the PTL and TSC

I also agree with Dhananjay => We spend too much effort on functional aspects 
for R1. There is still some issues to setup a full ONAP platform on Vanilla 
OpenStack.

Best regards

Eric

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



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.
_______________________________________________
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org<mailto:ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.onap.org_mailman_listinfo_onap-2Dtsc&d=DwICAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=IKSC5mg8GeOiSar1dax3GQ&m=rSkZu5gsdRT8HwFjzhd2QXyGHqPCRZUGh5Z88VRAiJs&s=o6YwYnIHiT-aLyFYu-yYBdw3IkZxVziwKVEUvMO7h6c&e=
_______________________________________________
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Reply via email to