[onap-tsc] PTL 2019-02-11 notes & reminder for meeting change

[Jim Baker]

 PTL Meeting 2019-02-18 is shifted one day to 2019-02-19 (same time)  -
see meeting invite under separate email 


*Notes from PTL meeting 2019-02-11*

Duration 60 minutes

Zoom Bridge https://zoom.us/j/283628617
DurationAgenda ItemRequested byNotes / Links
START RECORDING
5min Casablanca Maintenance Release

Catherine Lefèvre 

   - Incomplete release notes? UsecaseUI, Modeling
   - Need support from the Documentation project - changes have been made
   but are not reflected in the release note: AAI, Integration and Logging =>
   Potentially missing to update the git submodule in the doc project in the
   Casablanca branch to publish the changes. See this as an example:
   https://gerrit.onap.org/r/#/c/78201/


   - Release announcement

10min

Dublin Release

   - M1 Follow-up (if any)
   - M2 preparation

Jim Baker 


Project conditionally passed M1: Documentation

Review list of action items on Dublin requirements

   - Locale/Internationalization language support Tao Shen
   
   - xNF communication security enhancements Linda Horn
   to be followed-up with Security
   Subcommittee
   - SOL 004 (VNF Package Security) Samuli Kuusela
    to be followed-up with
   Security Subcommittee
   - S3P- Geo-Redundancy Jason Hunt 
   - Security by Design Amy Zwarico 
- Proposed Updates to Release Templates (Dublin) - Security Questions
   
.
   If no feedback from PTL by 2/12 noon CET then M2-M4will be sent to TSC for
   vote.
   - CI/CD Michael O'Brien 
   - Global Optimize (Shared DB) Eric Debeau
   Mike Elliott
   
   - Global Optimize (Component/Memory) Eric Debeau
    Mike Elliott
   
   - Container Optimization Adolfo Perez-Duran
    - Some debate on commercial
   support of Alpine (need vote). Dublin Testing Strategy to be defined -
   which container type will be used by the Integration Team.
   - E2E process automation Eric Debeau
   Bin Yang
   Alexis de Talhouët
   
   - Modularity Seshu Kumar M 
   - Change Management - Flexible designer/orchestrator Ajay Mahimkar
   
   - Consistent ID of a Cloud Region Bin Yang
   
   - S3P - Ugrade Capabilities Jason Hunt
   
   - CCVPN use case LIN MENG 


prioritize rest of agenda Jim Baker


extend PTL meeting?

focused topical meetings?

5mins
Don't break the build Yang Xu 

Discussion on the procedures and resource to enforce it

Current blockers reported by the Integration Team: Dublin Release
Integration Test Blocking Issues

5min

oParent scope and schedule overview

Checkstyle - Some work has been done regarding checkstyle - optional for
PTL's.

Amy Zwarico 

Pamela Dragosh 

oParent communication plan to PTLs still open - likely a Jira notification

TSC-71  - Coding Style InitiativeIN
PROGRESS- more draft pages of coding styles coming in the next couple weeks
15mins Upgrade Casablanca to Dublin - a demo

Mike Elliott 
Interactive session - at TSC
10mins Multi-CPU Detailed Strategy Plan/Resource Plan

Paul-Ionut Vaduva 
Focus on the test strategy and any additional resources - DEFER
5min ONAP CLI

Kanagaraj Manickam 
AAI, SDC, SO, Policy, APPC, SDNC and MSB  CLI commands in Dublin release?
10min

Datalake approved as a POC

Start to discuss project impact

either as producers of for example Elasticsearch as a Service

or as consumers of for example multitenant MySQL/MariaDB/PostregSQL aaS

and for new services like Containerized Hadoop as a Service

>From TSC meet

Vijay Venkatesh Kumar 


Michael O'Brien  (as
collaborator only)


Project APIs

   - please add

Collaboration jiras below

ONAPARC-264 

[onap-tsc] Event: PTL Meeting - Tuesday, 19 February 2019 #cal-invite

[onap-tsc@lists.onap.org Calendar]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Groups.io Inc//ONAP Calendar//EN
METHOD:PUBLISH
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:calendar.433...@lists.onap.org
DTSTAMP:20190215T194825Z
ORGANIZER;CN=Jim Baker:mailto:jba...@linuxfoundation.org
DTSTART;TZID=America/Denver:20190219T07
DTEND;TZID=America/Denver:20190219T08
SUMMARY:PTL Meeting
DESCRIPTION:Jim Baker (LFN) is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.\n \nTopic: Jim Baker (LFN)'s Personal Meeting Room\n \nJoin Zoom Meeting\nhttps://zoom.us/j/2731206358\n \nOne tap mobile\n+16699006833,,2731206358# US (San Jose)\n+16465588656,,2731206358# US (New York)\n \nDial by your location\n        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)\n        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)\n        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free\n        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free\nMeeting ID: 273 120 6358\nFind your local number: https://zoom.us/u/aqqtVzl7L
LOCATION:https://zoom.us/j/2731206358
SEQUENCE:0
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR


invite.ics
Description: application/ics

Re: [onap-tsc] Committer promotion requests for Integration

[Stephen Terrill]

Hi Jim,

I may have missed something here.

The community charter states:

3.2.2.1 Adding Committers
•Initial Committers for a project will be specified at project creation
•Committer rights for a project are earned via contribution and community 
trust. Committers for a project select and vote for new Committers for that 
project, subject to TSC approval.
•New Committers for a project should have a demonstrable established history of 
meritocratic contributions.

The TSC delegated vetting the requests to the release manager.  The PTLs cannot 
just modify these according to our current governance.

BR,

Steve.


From: Jim Baker 
Sent: Friday 15 February 2019 01:19
To: Stephen Terrill 
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Kenny Paul 
Subject: Re: Committer promotion requests for Integration

Delays these days are running in the weeks time frames as the PTLs haven't 
embraced the responsibility of modifying their own INFO.yaml files.
These files are the user readable source of truth for the committers and 
rel_eng requests the gerritt merge be completed and the gerritt
link to be produced to prove the LDAP that they control (the real SoT) is in 
alignment with the INFO.yaml.

I'd LOVE to see the community take over this task as I really fail to see how 
LFN adds value here.
Thoughts?
Jim

On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 5:06 PM Stephen Terrill 
mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
Hi Jim,

Thanks for the reply.  I appreciate that you taking the role.  Earlier the 
committer approval process was delegate to the release responsible and I don’t 
recall a decision to change this, though that can be re-evaluated and done.  My 
view is that the value added is speed in the case of normal approval as a 
voting process takes time.

BR,

Steve

From: Jim Baker mailto:jba...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Sent: Thursday 14 February 2019 22:50
To: Stephen Terrill 
mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Kenny Paul 
mailto:kp...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: Committer promotion requests for Integration

Hey Steve,
There was a TSC discussion about release manager and infrastructure manager 
roles - but apparently no vote on the matter as I found the issue still open:

(TSC) Finalize discussions about the Infrastructure Role

I have been acting as a proxy for the TSC in committer adds/deletes, repo 
creation (acting infrastructure manager),  and coordinating other 
infrastructure topics.
Today @TSCmeeting I announced that myself et.al. would be coming 
forward with a roadmap of LF infrastructure plans for the coming few months.

In terms of the committer approval process did you want to propose a change? 
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
I weigh all the tasks the LFN staff does with the simple "do we create value by 
performing this action"?
Committer management needs a control point - but it's hard to say we create 
value by being that control point...
What do you think?
Jim

On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:30 PM Stephen Terrill 
mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>> wrote:
Hi,

I just wanted to check the process on this now.  Originally for each the 
committer promotion and new repository requests, the TSC held a vote.  Then 
this was streamlined we decided to have the release responsible, and if it was 
all OK (voted by PTLs, history of Metacritic contribution, a reasonable and 
small number of committers; then release manager OKd and the TSC was informed, 
otherwise it was raised to the TSC by the release manager for further 
discussion and final decision.  We have had a change of guard but no decision 
to re-evaluate the process.  I assume then that we continue to follow the same. 
With this email I wanted to check that we have a common assumption regarding 
this.

BR,

Steve

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Yang Xu
Sent: Tuesday 12 February 2019 06:48
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Jim Baker 
mailto:jba...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 'Kenny Paul' 
mailto:kp...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: [onap-tsc] Committer promotion requests for Integration

Dear TSC,

Integration team has voted to promote Brian Freeman (5/5 votes) and Mariusz 
Wagner(4/5 votes) to Integration committers. Please see their promotion 
requests here:

https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Integration+Committer+Promotion+Requests+for+Brian+Freemam
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Integration+Committer+Promotion+Requests+for+Mariusz+Wagner

Best regards,

-Yang Xu
Integration PTL





--
Jim Baker
Linux Foundation Networking - Technical Program Manager
mobile: +1 970 227 6007


--
Jim Baker
Linux Foundation Networking - Technical Program Manager
mobile: +1 970 227 6007

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#4630): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/4630
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/29747106/21656
Group Owner: