requirements sub currently does not set prioritization.
Pamela Dragosh the control-loop sub was set up to align projects, but seeing control-loop work that is occurring without participation in the subcommittee
Kenny Paul subcommittees can make recommendations on priorities to TSC
Catherine Lefevre the requirements subcommittee become the ONAP product owner?
Pawel Pawlak new seccom requirements could go through requirements for alignment, best-practices once adopted should not be re-submitted for each release
Seshu Kumar Mudiganti technical debt can become a requirement for the next release - may impact multiple projects. as long as internal change w/out API impact not need to route to req sub
Consensus:
any requirements- regardless of source- should go through the requirements subcommittee.
and euag submits requirements to req. sub where they are vetted
committee consolidates backlog
committee should make prioritization recommendations to the TSC
Enhance the mission of the Requirements Subcommittee:
Act as the ONAP Product Owners
Recommend Prioritization to the TSC
Create the consolidated ONAP Backlog coming from the different streamlines (outside/internal + EAUG)
As an example, EUAG/SECCOM/Control Loops → REq Subcommittee prioritirised → (Architecture Review if required) → TSC
Actions
Alla Goldner lead a "recharter" of Requirements sub to align with the new proposed mission.