Anuket Project

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

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 25 Next »

 

Attendees 

  1. Al Morton
  2. Walter Kozlowski
  3. Riccardo Gasparetto Stori (Vodafone)
  4. Beth Cohen (Verizon)
  5. Emma Foley (Red Hat)
  6. Frank Brockners (Cisco)
  7. Sridhar Rao  (Spirent)

Absent (TSC)

  1. Qiao Fu (China Mobile)
  2. Ahmed El Sawaf (STC)
  3. Trevor Cooper (Intel)
  4. Mark Beierl (Canonical)
  5. Lincoln Lavoie  (UNH-IOL)
  6. Georg Kunz (Ericsson)
  7. Cedric Ollivier (Orange)
  8. Gergely Csatari (Nokia)

Other Attendees 

  1. Jim Baker
  2.  Pankaj Goyal
  3. Jie Niu
  4. Toshiyasu Wakayama
  5. Trevor Bramwell
  6. David McBride
  7. Scot Steele

Agenda


TimeTopicPresentersNotes


Meeting Administration

  • Linux Foundation Anti-trust Policy
  • Agenda Bashing
  • Attendance/Quorum
  • Approval of previous meeting minutes
Chairs

5 min

Announcements

Chairs

5 min
  • Meeting between LF and Orange legal teams to clarify positions about DCO and CLA
Jim BakerTo update TSC about the proposed meeting's objectives, scope and timeframe

15 min

On Docshttps://readthedocs.org/projects/anuket/ already exists. There is a need for consolidated documentation (which was earlier driven in OPNFV by the docs project).


15 min
  • Tools Migration - gitlab migration

As you are aware, LF has been investing in IT Modernization with a key focus of cost efficiencies and modernizing the workflow of open source projects throughout the LF. In 2019 the LFN TAC sponsored the Infrastructure Working Group recommending moving all the projects to "as a Service" implementations, specifically naming gitlab. Gitlab offers benefits in the developer experience, platform tooling, and resource management.

Specifically:

  • Developer experience: Gitlab provides a platform that is familiar for newer developers coming from Github, moves CI configurations next to the code, and enables projects to take advantage of Gitlab free container builds and CI's resources.
  • Platform tooling: There are security, dependency and licence scanning tools that can easily be integrated into CI to increase security and compliance, and container and package repositories that can be used to reduce CI reliance on other platforms (eg. Dockerhub).
  • Resource management: Moving to Gitlab.com will reduce the project's hosting costs, leverage Gitlab's SLA, and allow them to take advantage of features released monthly.

To mitigate the risk of this migration we plan on:
  1.  Running existing toolchains in parallel with the bring up of gitlab
  2.  Migrate projects as they become ready
  3.  Having LF IT do the work of migrating the CI/CD configurations
  4.  Utilizing LaaS resources when generic hardware is needed for validation.
  5.  Pulling in developers to double-check LF IT's work, and coordinate timing to enroll the hardware in Gitlab.


 Learn more about the roadmap here: Transformation Roadmap & Process



5 min
  • Technical officers proposal

Chief Technical Editor

ONAP Technical Coordinator

CNCF Technical Coordinator

CVC Technical Coordinator

Automation and Tooling

ONF: Open Networking Foundation

ETSI

Open Infrastructure

GSMA

LFN EUAG

5G Session to promote RA2:

TIP

ODIM

XGVela

oRAN

Others?

Walter KozlowskiProposal to nominate technical officers to lead particular technical and strategic collaboration activities. 

15 min
  • Assuming a successful Anuket recruiting program
    • Anticipate new people in the specification WS and the Development Projects.
    • Thus developer on-boarding needs to be really easy, incl. a comprehensive set of documentation, wiki, etc. 
    • What are the activities to accomplish this?



0 min




10 min
  • Wiki site updates
    • Anuket Wiki page 
      • We'll use spaces to avoid namespace conflicts. But use with care.
    • If you want sub-trees copied from CNTT or OPNFV wiki, send email to Jim Baker, identifying the root of the sub-tree. Jim will create the associated tickets with LF. 
      • How did we do on this call for action?
      • Will we drop blank Wiki Pages from the Wiki? (#agree on this??)
    •  Further topics:
      • Alignment of groups/IDs across LF LDAP and Github.
      • Issue tracking (Jira/Github?).  
    • Active OPNFV JIRA users: New Instance for Anuket!
      • File a ticket support.linuxfoundation.org for migration of your jira.opnfv.org project to jira.anuket.io as needed

Jim Baker Everyone

  • Anuket per project wiki:
    TSC AGREES to remove projects from the wiki that don't update their wiki by  . Note that this does not include archiving the project (which might happen at a later stage).

15 min
  • Active Repo Migration
  • DockerHub Migration - no change to OPNFV Dockerhub
  • Contributor License Agreement → Only "DCO": Developer's Certificate of Origin

https://opensource.com/article/18/3/cla-vs-dco-whats-difference

Jim Baker
  • Copy active docker repos to: https://hub.docker.com/u/anuket, and instruct projects on how to update CI.
    • Barometer
    • Dovetail (dovetail-webportal)
    • Functest
    • LaaS
    • NFVBench
    • SampleVNF
    • Storperf
  • Propose 6 months Interval for active project MIRRORS repo migration
  • OPNFV Dockerhub will continue to exist - proposal is to CLONE repos in Anuket space, and it's up to projects to update their CI.
  • Only DCO is planned in Anuket: indemnify LF regarding applicable licenses.
    • Any concerns?  no, more follow-up.

10 min
  • Workstream Leads/ Project PTLs standup (continued)
  • Volunteers are needed to re-juvenate
    • DOCS  what's next?
      • Projects write the documentation - the DOCS project is mostly about organizing and structuring the content.
      • Can this be a small part of the Release process for Development documents?
    • PHAROS -??? Can we get a view of the project-wide resources that are at our disposal, and how we manage them?
      • Need a person to step up for this, it's an important job!
  • STATUS still needed from:
PTLs/Co-Chairs
  • "Pharos":
    • Anuket needs a view of the available build/deploy/lab (incl. member labs) resources. TSC looks for volunteers to provide that overview - so that we can effectively use Anuket's budget in 2021 (before we spend money on new resources, the TSC needs a proper view on the current set of resources and their availability).
    • ACTION: for all PTLs - identify the Lab resources you are currently using!
      • This should give us a fairly broad view, but only as complete as the response.

5 min
  • Status Updates

    • Linux Foundation Lab (Portland) hardware upgrade status
    • LF IT/Infra update: (Aric GardnerTrevor Bramwell)
    • gitlab POC
    • GSMA interaction

  • Please don't use the UCS pod - trying to de-commission, but there are some Functest jobs running there - suggest to move toi LaaS.
  • LF Pods 4 and 5 are in Portland - will move to Oregon State to save costs. Scheduling has been a problem. Current allocation of 4 and 5 to Functest
  • gitlab POC: Scheduled follow-up discussion from the DDF for next Monday
  • Joint meeting with OITF with FASG planned for 10 March.

5 min
  • AOB
    • Renaming VSPERF. 
Sridhar RaoFuture of VSPERF


Future topics:

  • How do we figure out who are the WS stream leads AND PTLs in an automated way?

Outstanding Action Items:

  • For all PTLs - identify the Lab resources you are currently using!  by  
  • No labels