Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.



  • Catherine Lefevre these are the long term thoughts on where we may want to move
  • Marek Chwal  highlights the many dependencies between trains anc communities
  • Ciaran Johnston  proposal would require stronger alignment between communities
  • Robert Varga  would need to do more upstream work and smaller "chunks" of deliverables
  • Ranny Haiby could be shorter self releases
  • Catherine Lefevre a control loop would be required - hard to represent on slide 9.  perspective is that branch would occur @ RC0
  • Krzysztof Opasiak  continousous development - freeze current and immediately branch for next release. as-is end up in a weird state that we can't enforce for next release.  not all best practices are agreed to in a release because they have not been listed as requirements  
  • Marek Chwal Product owners work the in "gray train"
  • Catherine Lefevre agreed that better alignment of best practices
  • Benjamin Cheung for ONAP could we ease into a transition rather then a big jump
  • Catherine Lefevre one approace could be to prototype with a couple of components
  • Robert Varga in ODL basically 3 types of projects "managed release integrated", "snapshot integrated", "self-release" .  Making more and more projects release-integrated - selecting a few well understood and well staffed projects to try this out in ONAP
  • Dan Timoney Controller Design Studio (CDS) can pursue it's own cycle because the # of cross dependencies are limited.
  • Ram Krishna Verma  is 2-3 monts to get to SR4
  • Ciaran Johnston  quality of content @ SR1 should be same as SR4
  • Catherine Lefevre  after M4 need to make sure there are no regressions