Thank you everybody for your participation in the first OpenContrail Governance Summit. We had great attendance both in person and on the phone. To recap the meeting for those who did not get a chance to attend we had keynotes by Ryan Van Wyk and Randy Bias kicking of the meeting. Followed by discussion of the umbrella foundation and governance structure for the project. Small group breakout sessions focused on identifying barriers to adoption. Finally we had presentations from Mirantis and Juniper on their planned contributions to the OpenContrail roadmap and a session recap.
During the summit we agreed to form 3 working groups, Governance, TSC and Infra.
Governance Working Group
- Liza Fong (AT&T)
- Greg Elkinbard (Juniper)
- Ian Rae (Cloud Ops)
- Jim St. Leger (Intel)
Deliverables
- Overall project goal(s)
- OpenContrail mission statement
- Enumerate the “primary use cases” for OpenContrail
- To be used as guiding light for prioritization and sanity-checking of code, directionality of project, and measuring stick for formal TSC to make decisions
- Governance charter
- Foundation options and recommendation
- We agreed to box out (not an option):
- Make a new foundation (the world doesn’t need)
- Run with no foundation (need a more clear departure from Juniper)
- We agreed to box out (not an option):
- Recommendation on OCAB-like body to represent end users early and loudly
- Establish governance document repo
TSC Working Group
- Joseph Gasparakis (Intel)
- Ash Bhalgat (Mellanox)
- Masood Amin (Aricent)
- Edgar Magana (Workday)
- Aniket Daptari (Juniper)
Deliverables
- Proposed technical governance structure including model
- Rationale for this model
- Diagram/workflow (this is important)
- Process for revising technical processes
- Proposed set of sub-projects/components along with mapping of existing repos (4 weeks)
- What do we have? Where is it? Do we use it? Who owns it?
- Project wide structure and subcomponent structure. (TSC/PTL like)
- Establish guidelines for proposing and approving feature scope, documentation, design, development, CI/CD configuration and release management
- Proposed set of guidelines for coding, architecture, and accepting code
- Recommend release cadence
- What are the artifacts that the OpenContrail community is responsible for? Packages? Ansible scripts? Containers? Recommend.
Community Infrastructure Working Group
- Paul Carver (AT&T) paul.carver@att.com
- Pranav Singh (Aricent)
- Nabeel Asim (Tech true up)
- Jakub Pavlik (Mirantis)
- TEMP: Joseph Gasparakis (Intel)
- JUNIPER LIAISON: Aniket Daptari (Juniper)
Deliverables
- Evaluate current automated test coverage, identify gaps, and establish automated test coverage standards for all future development
- Identify short term pain points for current SDLC process:
- Assessment of current challenges to contribution to identify all top level problem areas
- Identify what short term changes Juniper can make to open up and create transparency around the build/release process
- Create a working plan
- Recommend a system for public OpenContrail documentation
- Assess unit test coverage, functional test coverage, performance test coverage
To recap the adoption recommendations from the small group session:
- Open and transparent community (AT&T)
- How does feature/bug in OC makes it into CC (AT&T, Serro)
- Self cert for bug fixes (AT&T)
- Committer ownership
- Open and clean up Docs, Test, CI
- Project awareness, participation in other communities
- Ease of deployment (out of the box OpenStack, Kubernetes, OpenShift, ONAP, AWS, Google)
- Clean up external dependencies
- Create Sandbox
- Clearly define release cadence
- Uniform packaging, transition from OC to CC
Full notes are available in https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Rhu2YrX594WRut4IRu8Rkvsy2cXvcPyOKA1i8EGZc0U/edit#
Next meetings are tentatively set for early Sept and mid October. Please look for date announcements at dev@lists.opencontrail.org.
