/
TSC 2017-09-27 (Paris F2F)

TSC 2017-09-27 (Paris F2F)

Dec 07, 2017

Date

Sep 27, 2017

 

Recording .  Meeting starts at timestamp 06:25:50 (385:50)

Agenda Item

Requested by

Notes / Links

Agenda Item

Requested by

Notes / Links

Beijing Release Calendar Proposal

Gildas

 

Committer Diversity & Upstream First Cultural Discussion

Helen

 

December 11-13 Amsterdam event

Mazin

 

Rewards

Mazin

ONAP Marketing

@Lisa Caywood

Available via the recording only due to context dependent content

Versioning

@jamil.chawki

#onap-meeting: TSC, 2017-09-27-F2F

Meeting started by kennypaul at 12:51:03 UTC (full logs). 


Meeting summary

  1. rollcall (kennypaul, 12:51:47)

    1. Huabing Zhao, Proxy of Zhaoxing Meng, ZTE (Huabing_Zhao, 12:53:39)

    2. Jason Hunt, IBM (JasonHunt, 12:58:17)

    3. Stephen Terrill, Ericsson (SteveT, 13:03:05)

    4. Ranny Haiby, Nokia (RannyHaiby, 13:03:23)

    5. Frank Brockners, Cisco (frankbrockners, 13:05:15)

    6. Chris Donley Huawei (cdonley, 13:06:03)

    7. , Arthur Berezin, Cloudify (ArthurBerezin, 13:09:19)

    8. aayush bhatnagar Reliance Jio (AayushJio, 13:11:07)

  2. Opening and Agenda (SteveT, 13:11:18)

    1. jamil for Orange (jamil, 13:11:29)

    2. Mazin of AT&T is present (phrobb, 13:11:51)

    3. Alla of Amdocs is present (phrobb, 13:12:45)

    4. Lingli of China Mobile is present (phrobb, 13:13:13)

  3. Beijing Release Calender Proposal (SteveT, 13:14:28)

    1. presented by Gildas (SteveT, 13:14:36)

    2. Susana Sabater Vodafone (Susana, 13:14:50)

    3. 6 month release would imply May 24 release for Beijing. (SteveT, 13:19:06)

    4. Question was raised whether we should support also an additional Amasterdam release. (SteveT, 13:30:14)

    5. Question - could we testing earlier? (SteveT, 13:30:44)

    6. The response was that we can (SteveT, 13:31:20)

    7. Target M1 for architecture and S3P reqs (SteveT, 13:33:19)

    8. Question: Do we maintain Amsterdamn or not. We need to decide what to do for vulnerabilities as well. (SteveT, 13:36:37)

    9. Start with code integration as earlier as possible (3 months??). (SteveT, 13:37:47)

    10. Need to decide on what is a release and do we branch. i.e. what is the branching strategy. (SteveT, 13:38:42)

    11. Extend the period between api freeze and code freeze by bringing earlier (SteveT, 13:40:07)

    12. Lingli asks if it is possible to offset the projects so that those projects that are depended upon hit API freeze sooner then those that depend on them. (phrobb, 13:41:57)

    13. Consider API freeze based on dependancy graph. e (SteveT, 13:43:51)

    14. Discussion about branching. Need to be very selective about the defects to print and bring from the main branch into the amasterdam release. Then there was a proposal that we should not have maintanance of Amsterdamn. (SteveT, 13:47:56)

    15. there was a proposal that a team could decide its branching strategy (i.e. when it decides what is master and what is "release". (SteveT, 13:51:52)

    16. Consider that SONAR works of the latest update. (SteveT, 13:52:39)

    17. When considering the branching strategy, need to consider whether allowing people to play with a version and fix the bugs. (SteveT, 13:53:56)

    18. Will come back to in the TSC Oct 5th. (SteveT, 13:55:11)

    19. As additional information, there is a separation of component releases from ONAP release (SteveT, 13:58:00)

    20. There is the comment that the Casablanca release will not be November, we should bring it into say Septebmer to align with oh (SteveT, 14:00:52)

  4. Release Versioning (SteveT, 14:01:00)

    1. Release version proposal was presented by Jamil. (SteveT, 14:01:44)

    2. correction - not LATE November. Possibly Sept to align with ODL/OPNFV/etc. or early Nov. TBD. (cdonley, 14:02:04)

    3. proposal is the Symantec versioning (x.y.z). (SteveT, 14:07:51)

    4. If approved we need to update and reflect the minor releases in the planning. (SteveT, 14:10:31)

    5. Helen raised that there has been a proposal for a project to release independently. This means that a project can release without having a "ONAP" release. (SteveT, 14:13:06)

    6. Helen raised that the integration infrastructure supports independent project release. (SteveT, 14:13:49)

    7. comment made recommending that we build a release plan and tools to allow components that don't have child dependents to release totally orthogonally from the ONAP release. ONAP could lead this type of flexibility (phrobb, 14:14:01)

    8. Gildas notes that devs don't like to work on main./bugs on stable release. Others note that bug fixes often happen in master and are cherry-picked to stable branch (phrobb, 14:19:51)

    9. updated proposal will be presented to TSC next week. (SteveT, 14:26:13)

  5. diversity and upstream culture (SteveT, 14:28:16)

    1. There was a question about how to handle the 36 hour rule on commits. The conclusion was that it was ok to abandon the committ at that stage. (SteveT, 14:33:29)

  6. December F2F (SteveT, 14:33:43)

    1. The December meeting will be both a ONAP developer meeting as well as a ONAP user meeting. (SteveT, 14:35:03)

    2. It is on 11-13 December, Santa Clara. (SteveT, 14:35:29)

    3. Aside from Beijing focus, there will be videos etc to address vacation. There is also a consideration of a Hackathon. (SteveT, 14:37:07)

    4. Correction Aside from Beijing focus, there will be videos etc to address end users. There is consideration of a hackathon on the first day.(SteveT, 14:40:55)

    5. There was a suggestion for a hackfest of the developers working on the projects as well. (SteveT, 14:44:31)

    6. Next opportunity would be is in March. (SteveT, 14:48:05)

    7. consider other universities and getting ONAP univeristy material adopted in the universities. (SteveT, 14:48:33)

    8. There was a suggestion from the modelling committee to suggest a 1 day workshop with SDOs. (SteveT, 14:52:28)

  7. ONAP marketing (SteveT, 14:52:44)

    1. Marking update was presented (SteveT, 15:02:14)

    2. If it is a for profit event using ONAP. Inform LF. (SteveT, 15:08:08)

    3. What about also targeting enterprise industry events. (SteveT, 15:08:23)

    4. what about the December OPNFV plugfest? (SteveT, 15:13:04)

    5. - response was that we were trying to colocate the ONAP F2F in december with the OPNFV plugfest. It wasn't fesible. (SteveT, 15:14:08)

  8. Reward (SteveT, 15:14:21)

    1. different awards a suggested . Company, information, .... (SteveT, 15:16:29)

    2. For those that feel strongely about the awards, inform Mazin. (SteveT, 15:17:58)

    3. Apply the awards in the Dec F2F meeting (SteveT, 15:18:40)

  9. Lessons Learned (SteveT, 15:19:42)

    1. Due to lack of time, Eric and Catherine were requested to distribute the work. (SteveT, 15:20:18)

  10. AOB (SteveT, 15:20:23)

    1. Reminder. sub-committee coordinoators to provide weekly update. (SteveT, 15:20:57)

  11. Functional Requirements for R2 (SteveT, 15:22:52)

    1. Alla presented the functional requirements for R2 there were a summary of the UC work. (SteveT, 15:23:20)

    2. This identifies what is considered as important. Further work is required to dig into what is the gap from Release 1 (SteveT, 15:30:58)

    3. integration with thirdparty controllers is interacting with (SteveT, 15:33:27)



Meeting ended at 15:40:46 UTC (full logs). 


Action items

  1. (none)




People present (lines said)

  1. SteveT (58)

  2. phrobb (6)

  3. kennypaul (4)

  4. collabot` (4)

  5. JasonHunt (2)

  6. cdonley (2)

  7. frankbrockners (1)

  8. jamil (1)

  9. AayushJio (1)

  10. Huabing_Zhao (1)

  11. ArthurBerezin (1)

  12. Susana (1)

  13. RannyHaiby (1)



Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.