[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
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed
I plan to devote a large portion of the release meeting to this topic tomorrow. Please come prepared with your questions for Alec. I think that this change puts us on the path which will eventually lead toward a consolidated release process that incorporates the quickly evolving XCI system. I would like to see that we have sufficient discussion and review to ensure that we don't inadvertently disturb the Euphrates release, which is just next week. David On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Alec Hothan (ahothan) wrote: > > > 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 > > > > > -- *David McBride* Release Manager, OPNFV Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org Skype: davidjmcbride1 IRC: dmcbride ___ 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
I had a quick look at the wiki page and try to understand the rationale behind proposal. If I understand it correctly, it is like - *opnfv-x.y.z* to sync with OPNFV official releasing cycle, i.e. Danube, Euphrates (opnfv-5.y.z). - *(optional) x.y.z* for project intermediate release which is managed by each project. Please correct me if anything wrong. I would vote +1 based on the understanding above. On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:34 AM Alec Hothan (ahothan) wrote: > > > 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 > -- Yujun Zhang ___ 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
That is correct. The opnfv.x.y.z are actually tags managed by the OPNFV release not by project owners. They are always on stable branches. The x.y.z tags are always on master and controlled by project owners (if they want to have such tags as they are optional). Thanks Alec From: "Yujun Zhang (ZTE)" Date: Monday, September 25, 2017 at 5:55 PM To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" , "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed I had a quick look at the wiki page and try to understand the rationale behind proposal. If I understand it correctly, it is like - opnfv-x.y.z to sync with OPNFV official releasing cycle, i.e. Danube, Euphrates (opnfv-5.y.z). - (optional) x.y.z for project intermediate release which is managed by each project. Please correct me if anything wrong. I would vote +1 based on the understanding above. On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:34 AM Alec Hothan (ahothan) mailto:ahot...@cisco.com>> wrote: 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<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss -- Yujun Zhang ___ 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
+1 From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Alec Hothan (ahothan) Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 9:34 PM To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org 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
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed
+1 From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Georg Kunz Sent: 2017年9月26日 15:37 To: Alec Hothan (ahothan) ; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed +1 From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Alec Hothan (ahothan) Sent: Monday, September 25, 2017 9:34 PM To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> 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
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
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed
+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<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> Cc: David McBride mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; Fatih Degirmenci mailto:fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>>; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>; Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) mailto:tapio.tallg...@nokia.com>> 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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.opnfv.org_display_releng_OPNFV-2Bprojects-2Band-2BOPNFV-2Brelease-2Bversioning&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=BnFOET7vVz-l5p-4mFgkGMGDJq3nJ0-m_uI0LdNLdQY&s=KH73GpdZq3OZ_SwuUHsjspzPst6HyDEYqE5lm4amMts&e=> (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
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed
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 < > fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) < > fbroc...@cisco.com>; Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < > tapio.tallg...@nokia.com> > *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 > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.opnfv.org_display_releng_OPNFV-2Bprojects-2Band-2BOPNFV-2Brelease-2Bversioning&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=BnFOET7vVz-l5p-4mFgkGMGDJq3nJ0-m_uI0LdNLdQY&s=KH73GpdZq3OZ_SwuUHsjspzPst6HyDEYqE5lm4amMts&e=> > (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
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) <mailto:acmor...@att.com>> 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> > [mailto: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 > <mailto: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 > <mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > Cc: David McBride <mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; Fatih Degirmenci > mailto:fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>>; Frank > Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>; > Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) <mailto:tapio.tallg...@nokia.com>> > 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 > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.opnfv.org_display_releng_OPNFV-2Bprojects-2Band-2BOPNFV-2Brelease-2Bversioning&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=BnFOET7vVz-l5p-4mFgkGMGDJq3nJ0-m_uI0LdNLdQY&s=KH73GpdZq3OZ_SwuUHsjspzPst6HyDEYqE5lm4amMts&e=> > (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 <mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > <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
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 mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org>> 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) mailto:acmor...@att.com>> 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> [mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> Cc: David McBride mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; Fatih Degirmenci mailto:fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>>; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>; Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) mailto:tapio.tallg...@nokia.com>> 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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.opnfv.org_display_releng_OPNFV-2Bprojects-2Band-2BOPNFV-2Brelease-2Bversioning&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=OfsSu8kTIltVyD1oL72cBw&m=BnFOET7vVz-l5p-4mFgkGMGDJq3nJ0-m_uI0LdNLdQY&s=KH73GpdZq3OZ_SwuUHsjspzPst6HyDEYqE5lm4amMts&e=> (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<mailto: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<mailto: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
+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 mailto:jalaus...@suse.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" mailto:ahot...@cisco.com>>, "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>" mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>> Cc: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" mailto:acmor...@att.com>>, Raymond Paik mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org>> 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 mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org>> 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) mailto:acmor...@att.com>> 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> [mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> Cc: David McBride mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; Fatih Degirmenci mailto:fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>>; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>; Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) mailto:tapio.tallg...@nokia.com>> 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<https://url10.mailanyone.net/v1/?m=1dxIWZ-0001lR-44&i=57e1b682&c=ctiaIuwOIzw1UK1w-TORMjIsBTt8Xj_35pTD34cLBOnBwRvLtDG-pl1qrxZlmRQtZWujTAbkl_FfrNoQsakacUMRcUcjWib584JczR8elpqX1jlZSjfDK7KS3-zPiNIH5-KNbwvBUKVehjGFFMyjJGnXy4PLDpSGU1LqCaJeO0tuOpvp0xlws6DK3U1niforYXvMMsnioGAAyNdpIl9AMaZLHHFkTYbLww31iptsI1qvv310kT5IT7dQ_jKzZegPJJt9oZ0TBrVIKu-XFnGYzKt00A-zsEzeJ3bkuUye9KgPUa2AhsbXYdql0AdRxczwkFZ1z4R2ADa6zJfhTjFjkV2pN24hvekYpEGHFmwoGIvJYcHGhSXq0Uv12Q3ssM-iXVhQXs4Qeu-axFawUZOPLt31DnA15mJztoDjsMGLaBtAMvSXeT9WVsaoQmhYVfdC82zOAX46jphYNaU4upVvF6aifs5hOhYBfAeBxYla3B7yTdFTPMg5I2PcYn0Rnlpq7Ul3VV3IMV82kzzu-S0CvUR_mNiDcAz7B0jzWelFA9R68B7yOW1l5w1JhdOeEWRn> (thanks for Fatih, David, Frank, Tapio for reviewing) In a nutshell, this adjustment is needed to prepare the path for proper continu
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 mailto:jalaus...@suse.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" mailto:ahot...@cisco.com>>, "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>" mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>> Cc: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" mailto:acmor...@att.com>>, Raymond Paik mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org>> 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 mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org>> 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) mailto:acmor...@att.com>> 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> [mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> Cc: David McBride mailto:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; Fatih Degirmenci mailto:fatih.degirme...@ericsson.com>>; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>; Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) mailto:tapio.tallg...@nokia.com>> 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
Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] urgent euphrates git tags vote needed
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 mailto:alexandru.avada...@enea.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 1:07 PM To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" mailto:ahot...@cisco.com>>, "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>" mailto: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> [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<mailto: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 mailto:jalaus...@suse.com>> Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 12:17 PM To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" mailto:ahot...@cisco.com>>, "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>" mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>> Cc: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" mailto:acmor...@att.com>>, Raymond Paik mailto:rp...@linuxfoundation.org>> 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
