Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 2 Next »


Sorted inputs - by category

Release Process

  • Self release process had a few hiccups but seems better now
  • gerrit/jenkins/jira stability issues still occurring sporadicly

Product Creation

  • Job Deployer for OOM (and now SO) was great CI improvement.  Noticeable impact to reviewing merges when Job Deployer was offline due to lab issues.
  • Addition of Azure public cloud resources is helping with the verify job load.
  • Need to continue with more projects added to CI pipeline and tests targeted for the specific project (e.g., instantiateVFWCL , ./vcpe.py infra , rescustservice for SO)


Testing Process

  • Adding Orange and Ericsson Labs to installation testing was a good change. More  labs coming on board for this.

ONAP Project Oversight

  • Jira was improvement over wiki pages for milestone tracking but it still seems onerous on the PTLs
  • Need automated test result tracking for use cases

Others

  • PTL meetings seem more like tracking calls. Might want to consider a PTL committee that would run the PTL meetings.

====================================================================================================================================================

Have we fixed anything captured during the Dublin Retrospective?

Release Process

Product Creation

  • OOM verify job was very helpful - finding defects before merged into the charts
  • SECCOM TTL for test certificates doesn't impact the security - probably longer than a year
  • AAF underestimated the difficulty of changing the service locator
    • Infrastructure changes need to start very early in the release 
    • Plan for backward compatibility up front
  • Addition of OJSI Jira has been useful to create more focus on security issues - vulnerabilities are easier to track
    • Nexus vulnerabilities analysis still is very difficult - need some innovation

Testing Process

  • No overall platform team - not enough people have a picture of the complete platform
  • Off-line installation finding new issues - could be done earlier to find issues
  • Need to do installation testing in other places than just Windriver to catch environment assumptions
    • Diverse lab test envs (Orange) was helpful
    • Many versions of OpenStack
  • Project team engaging in the integration process accelerated the process of integration - zoom shared debug sessions (much faster than jira)
  • Early start of integration testing helps issue resolution earlier than the tail end of the release
  • RC0 attempt to integrate and test was not successful - no CI/CD and a large set of changes integrated at once negatively impacted system stability

ONAP Project Oversight

  • POC should not intervene with the ongoing ONAP Release content/timeline i.e. Dublin. POC should not hold the following release i.e. El-Alto
  • Retrospectives best done in person
  • Delay in Dublin - issues not found until the very end
    • Testing started earlier in the release
    • Functional deployments exposed more defects and happen late in the release
      • Intersystem testing should start sooner
      • Instantiate vFW as a step in the CI/CD process - fully automated testing and very stable
    • Requirements came too late in the process
    • Need to begin the testing of Functional requirements earlier
    • Teams need to be transparent into the actual status of the milestones - example: projects marked as code complete were not complete
    • Delay generated by the management of the Casablanca Maintenance Release
  • Lack of available lab resources   
  • Need to start with keystone V3 install in El Alto - installation jobs will be changed (authentication)




  • No labels