date:20170927

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

2017-09-27 Thread Bob Monkman

Alec,
  We have had this conversation with David and Ray a number of 
times in other areas.
  We definitely prefer the architecture specifier is included in 
all areas where there needs to be a distinction.

  The correct descriptor for ARM64 is actually “aarch64”, and I 
believe it is “x86_64” for x86 as described below.

  Again, as we have pointed out in other instances (and more need 
to be cleaned up over time), it is not acceptable to have x86_64 to be the 
default assumption and omitted, for x86. I do not have an opinion on the append 
front v append back, but what is important, as we clean these up is that we do 
_not_ end up with the following:

opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0  (this is considered x86_64, normal, regular, 
standard, while…)
opnfv/functest:aarch64-release-5.0.0, denotes this as special, different, 
subordinate, other (pick your favorite descriptor of 2nd class citizen).

We strongly insist that we begin to use x86_64 and aarch64 architecture 
descriptors everywhere where this is missing and where it shall be needed. And 
we realize this may need to happen over a couple of releases but it is 
important, for obvious equity reasons.

With Kind regards,
Bob


Robert (Bob) Monkman
Networking Software Strategy & Ecosystem Programs
ARM
150 Rose Orchard Way
San Jose, Ca 95134
M: +1.510.676.5490
Skype: robert.monkman

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Alec Hothan 
(ahothan)
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 3:26 PM
To: Alexandru Avadanii ; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed


Thanks for bringing up the multi-arch support and yes if we decide to go the 
route of adding the arch in the tag there is no problem doing so - although 
there does not seem to be any standard on where to place that string, I’ve seen 
tags with the arch at the front (e.g. opnfv/functest:x86_64-release-5.0.0), 
some at the back (opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0-x86_64).
I also see that in some cases a complete different arch specific docker org is 
created, for example the arm32v7 organization has only containers built for 
arm32v7:
https://hub.docker.com/u/arm32v7/
Same for arm64v8:
https://hub.docker.com/u/arm64v8/

If we follow that route, we’d have a new docker org for arm e.g. 
opnfv-arm64v8/functest:release-5.0.0, reserving opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0 
for x86 (for backward compatibility sake).
But that is a different discussion which we may need to decide on by MS11.
I don’t know if the container tag syntax for multi-arch is set in stone for 
Euphrates (copy Mark/David).

Thanks

   Alec




From: Alexandru Avadanii 
>
Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 1:07 PM
To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" >, 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1 for the tag prefix.

How about adding the architecture to that prefix?
e.g. opnfv/functest:x86_64-release-5.0.0


From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Alec Hothan 
(ahothan)
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 11:01 PM
To: Jose Lausuch; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

Jose,

I am fine with using the “release-” prefix instead. Any prefix can work. If we 
want something shorter: rel-5.0.0. We can leave that decision to David.

Note that what you call “none release” can actually be as important for project 
owners than those with the prefix ;-)
Looking at the bigger picture, the official releases are just a culmination of 
a flurry of non-release images in the CI/CD day to day work and chances are 
that some of those non-prefixed releases will end up being used by other 
projects than OPNFV releases.

Thanks for all that have voted so far!

   Alec




From: Jose Lausuch >
Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM
To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" >, 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Cc: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" >, 
Raymond Paik >
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1

What about using tag "release-x.y.z" instead of "opnfv-x.y.z" since the name 
“opnfv” is already

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

2017-09-27 Thread Alec Hothan (ahothan)

Thanks for bringing up the multi-arch support and yes if we decide to go the 
route of adding the arch in the tag there is no problem doing so - although 
there does not seem to be any standard on where to place that string, I’ve seen 
tags with the arch at the front (e.g. opnfv/functest:x86_64-release-5.0.0), 
some at the back (opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0-x86_64).
I also see that in some cases a complete different arch specific docker org is 
created, for example the arm32v7 organization has only containers built for 
arm32v7:
https://hub.docker.com/u/arm32v7/
Same for arm64v8:
https://hub.docker.com/u/arm64v8/

If we follow that route, we’d have a new docker org for arm e.g. 
opnfv-arm64v8/functest:release-5.0.0, reserving opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0 
for x86 (for backward compatibility sake).
But that is a different discussion which we may need to decide on by MS11.
I don’t know if the container tag syntax for multi-arch is set in stone for 
Euphrates (copy Mark/David).

Thanks

   Alec

From: Alexandru Avadanii 
Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 1:07 PM
To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" , 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1 for the tag prefix.

How about adding the architecture to that prefix?
e.g. opnfv/functest:x86_64-release-5.0.0

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Alec Hothan 
(ahothan)
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 11:01 PM
To: Jose Lausuch; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

Jose,

I am fine with using the “release-” prefix instead. Any prefix can work. If we 
want something shorter: rel-5.0.0. We can leave that decision to David.

Note that what you call “none release” can actually be as important for project 
owners than those with the prefix ;-)
Looking at the bigger picture, the official releases are just a culmination of 
a flurry of non-release images in the CI/CD day to day work and chances are 
that some of those non-prefixed releases will end up being used by other 
projects than OPNFV releases.

Thanks for all that have voted so far!

   Alec

From: Jose Lausuch >
Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM
To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" >, 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Cc: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" >, 
Raymond Paik >
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1

What about using tag "release-x.y.z" instead of "opnfv-x.y.z" since the name 
“opnfv” is already included in the image name? e.g. opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0
This way we differentiate between an official OPNFV release artifact from a 
none released.

- Jose -

On 27 Sep 2017, at 20:00, Raymond Paik 
> wrote:

All,

Please let Alec know if you have any other questions/feedback on the proposal.  
The plan is to have a quick vote on the TSC call next week (October 3rd).

Thanks,

Ray

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:38 AM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) 
> wrote:
+1 and thanks for the proposal, Alex!

Al

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org

[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org]
 On Behalf Of Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 4:44 AM
To: Alec Hothan (ahothan); 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1 – per what Alec mentioned below, the new tagging scheme is only a small 
change incremental change from the earlier plans, but offers a lot of 
flexibility moving forward.
Frank

From: Alec Hothan (ahothan)
Sent: Montag, 25. September 2017 21:34
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Cc: David McBride 
>; Fatih 
Degirmenci 
>; Frank 
Brockners (fbrockne) >; Tallgren, 
Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) 
>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

I would like to get a quick vote from any person that works directly or 
indirectly with code in OPNFV

Please reply with -1, 0 +1

For using prefixed git tags for the

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

2017-09-27 Thread Alexandru Avadanii

+1 for the tag prefix.

How about adding the architecture to that prefix?
e.g. opnfv/functest:x86_64-release-5.0.0

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Alec Hothan 
(ahothan)
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 11:01 PM
To: Jose Lausuch; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

Jose,

I am fine with using the “release-” prefix instead. Any prefix can work. If we 
want something shorter: rel-5.0.0. We can leave that decision to David.

Note that what you call “none release” can actually be as important for project 
owners than those with the prefix ;-)
Looking at the bigger picture, the official releases are just a culmination of 
a flurry of non-release images in the CI/CD day to day work and chances are 
that some of those non-prefixed releases will end up being used by other 
projects than OPNFV releases.

Thanks for all that have voted so far!

   Alec

From: Jose Lausuch >
Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM
To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" >, 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Cc: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" >, 
Raymond Paik >
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1

What about using tag "release-x.y.z" instead of "opnfv-x.y.z" since the name 
“opnfv” is already included in the image name? e.g. opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0
This way we differentiate between an official OPNFV release artifact from a 
none released.

- Jose -

On 27 Sep 2017, at 20:00, Raymond Paik 
> wrote:

All,

Please let Alec know if you have any other questions/feedback on the proposal.  
The plan is to have a quick vote on the TSC call next week (October 3rd).

Thanks,

Ray

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:38 AM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) 
> wrote:
+1 and thanks for the proposal, Alex!

Al

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org

[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org]
 On Behalf Of Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 4:44 AM
To: Alec Hothan (ahothan); 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1 – per what Alec mentioned below, the new tagging scheme is only a small 
change incremental change from the earlier plans, but offers a lot of 
flexibility moving forward.
Frank

From: Alec Hothan (ahothan)
Sent: Montag, 25. September 2017 21:34
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Cc: David McBride 
>; Fatih 
Degirmenci 
>; Frank 
Brockners (fbrockne) >; Tallgren, 
Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) 
>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

I would like to get a quick vote from any person that works directly or 
indirectly with code in OPNFV

Please reply with -1, 0 +1

For using prefixed git tags for the Euphrates release: “opnfv-5.0.0”

This is a slight change to the plan on record (which was to use “5.0.0”). This 
does NOT impact euphrates deliverables for participating OPNFV projects (git 
tags on stable/euphrates are applied by releng).
The only externally visible effect is the naming of container tags for 
Euphrates official images in DockerHub will be named accordingly (e.g. 
“opnfv/functest:opnfv-5.0.0”).
Everything else remains the same.

If you’d like to know more, the rationale is described here: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/releng/OPNFV+projects+and+OPNFV+release+versioning
 (thanks for Fatih, David, Frank, Tapio for reviewing)
In a nutshell, this

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

2017-09-27 Thread Alec Hothan (ahothan)

Jose,

I am fine with using the “release-” prefix instead. Any prefix can work. If we 
want something shorter: rel-5.0.0. We can leave that decision to David.

Note that what you call “none release” can actually be as important for project 
owners than those with the prefix ;-)
Looking at the bigger picture, the official releases are just a culmination of 
a flurry of non-release images in the CI/CD day to day work and chances are 
that some of those non-prefixed releases will end up being used by other 
projects than OPNFV releases.

Thanks for all that have voted so far!

   Alec

From: Jose Lausuch 
Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM
To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" , 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
Cc: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" , Raymond Paik 

Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1

What about using tag "release-x.y.z" instead of "opnfv-x.y.z" since the name 
“opnfv” is already included in the image name? e.g. opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0
This way we differentiate between an official OPNFV release artifact from a 
none released.

- Jose -

On 27 Sep 2017, at 20:00, Raymond Paik 
> wrote:

All,

Please let Alec know if you have any other questions/feedback on the proposal.  
The plan is to have a quick vote on the TSC call next week (October 3rd).

Thanks,

Ray

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:38 AM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) 
> wrote:
+1 and thanks for the proposal, Alex!

Al

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org

[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org]
 On Behalf Of Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 4:44 AM
To: Alec Hothan (ahothan); 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

+1 – per what Alec mentioned below, the new tagging scheme is only a small 
change incremental change from the earlier plans, but offers a lot of 
flexibility moving forward.
Frank

From: Alec Hothan (ahothan)
Sent: Montag, 25. September 2017 21:34
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Cc: David McBride 
>; Fatih 
Degirmenci 
>; Frank 
Brockners (fbrockne) >; Tallgren, 
Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) 
>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

I would like to get a quick vote from any person that works directly or 
indirectly with code in OPNFV

Please reply with -1, 0 +1

For using prefixed git tags for the Euphrates release: “opnfv-5.0.0”

This is a slight change to the plan on record (which was to use “5.0.0”). This 
does NOT impact euphrates deliverables for participating OPNFV projects (git 
tags on stable/euphrates are applied by releng).
The only externally visible effect is the naming of container tags for 
Euphrates official images in DockerHub will be named accordingly (e.g. 
“opnfv/functest:opnfv-5.0.0”).
Everything else remains the same.

If you’d like to know more, the rationale is described here: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/releng/OPNFV+projects+and+OPNFV+release+versioning
 (thanks for Fatih, David, Frank, Tapio for reviewing)
In a nutshell, this adjustment is needed to prepare the path for proper 
continuous delivery support by projects.
Any clarification/questions/discussion can be done over email or at the TSC or 
release meetings tomorrow.

Thank You.

  Alec

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

2017-09-27 Thread Jose Lausuch

+1

What about using tag "release-x.y.z" instead of "opnfv-x.y.z" since the name 
“opnfv” is already included in the image name? e.g. opnfv/functest:release-5.0.0
This way we differentiate between an official OPNFV release artifact from a 
none released.

- Jose -





> On 27 Sep 2017, at 20:00, Raymond Paik  wrote:
> 
> All, 
> 
> Please let Alec know if you have any other questions/feedback on the 
> proposal.  The plan is to have a quick vote on the TSC call next week 
> (October 3rd).
> 
> Thanks, 
> 
> Ray
> 
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:38 AM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)  > wrote:
> +1 and thanks for the proposal, Alex!
> 
>  
> 
> Al
> 
>  
> 
> From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
>  
> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
> ] On Behalf Of Frank 
> Brockners (fbrockne)
> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 4:44 AM
> To: Alec Hothan (ahothan); opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org 
> 
> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed
> 
>  
> 
> +1 – per what Alec mentioned below, the new tagging scheme is only a small 
> change incremental change from the earlier plans, but offers a lot of 
> flexibility moving forward.
> 
> Frank
> 
>  
> 
> From: Alec Hothan (ahothan) 
> Sent: Montag, 25. September 2017 21:34
> To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org 
> 
> Cc: David McBride  >; Fatih Degirmenci 
> >; Frank 
> Brockners (fbrockne) >; 
> Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo)  >
> Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> I would like to get a quick vote from any person that works directly or 
> indirectly with code in OPNFV
> 
>  
> 
> Please reply with -1, 0 +1
> 
>  
> 
> For using prefixed git tags for the Euphrates release: “opnfv-5.0.0”
> 
>  
> 
> This is a slight change to the plan on record (which was to use “5.0.0”). 
> This does NOT impact euphrates deliverables for participating OPNFV projects 
> (git tags on stable/euphrates are applied by releng).
> 
> The only externally visible effect is the naming of container tags for 
> Euphrates official images in DockerHub will be named accordingly (e.g. 
> “opnfv/functest:opnfv-5.0.0”).
> 
> Everything else remains the same.
> 
>  
> 
> If you’d like to know more, the rationale is described here: 
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/releng/OPNFV+projects+and+OPNFV+release+versioning
>  
> 
>  (thanks for Fatih, David, Frank, Tapio for reviewing)
> 
> In a nutshell, this adjustment is needed to prepare the path for proper 
> continuous delivery support by projects.
> 
> Any clarification/questions/discussion can be done over email or at the TSC 
> or release meetings tomorrow.
> 
>  
> 
> Thank You.
> 
>  
> 
>   Alec
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org 
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] SFC weeekly MoMs

2017-09-27 Thread Manuel Buil

Hi,

Here are the MoMs of today's weekly meeting:

http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-sfc/2017/opnfv-sfc.
2017-09-27-14.00.html

Regards,
Manuel___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed

[opnfv-tech-discuss] SFC weeekly MoMs

6 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information