Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Weekly Meetings

  • Weekly on Monday at 8:00 PST or 15:00 UTC (during US daylight saving)

  • GTM Link
  • Minutes at Infra Working Group Meeting
  • IRC #opnfv-meeting -

  • Chaired by Jack Morgan for Sep/Oct (meetings chaired by Infra PTLs on a 2-month basis) 

  • You can also dial in using your phone with Access Code: 819-733-085  

    • United States +1 (312) 757-3126 

    • Australia +61 2 8355 1040 

    • Austria +43 7 2088 0034 

    • Belgium +32 (0) 28 93 7018 

    • Canada +1 (647) 497-9350 

    • Denmark +45 69 91 88 64 

    • Finland +358 (0) 923 17 0568 

    • France +33 (0) 170 950 592 

    • Germany +49 (0) 692 5736 7211 

    • Ireland +353 (0) 15 360 728 

    • Italy +39 0 247 92 13 01 

    • Netherlands +31 (0) 208 080 219 

    • New Zealand +64 9 280 6302 

    • Norway +47 75 80 32 07 

    • Spain +34 911 82 9906 

    • Sweden +46 (0) 853 527 836 

    • Switzerland +41 (0) 435 0167 13 

    • United Kingdom +44 (0) 330 221 0086 

Scope and Goals

Working Group scope is all  infrastructure cross project initiatives activities with cross-project impact ... this includes

  • Dashboards for use of lab and CI resources
  • Prioritization / allocation of lab resources .. see Hardware Infrastructure
  • Inconsistencies in use of CI resources


October 30


  1. Status Updates
  2. General purpose docker build capability
    • who owns docker builds for releases? historically, docker build have been created by projects
    • community needs to create a proposal to help solve this which includes gathering requirements and defining the process to getting docker builds created/removed, etc
  3. Logging facility (e.g. for ODL, OVS, etc.)
    • problem statement - when debugging failures, it would helpful to have a central location to collect logs
    • this is helpful both for centralizing logs for upstream communities to investigate and for defect reporting purposes 
  4. POD allocation within OPNFV Community
    • does two POD per installer model make sense still?
    • Intel lab has found that CI POD users are not using hardware resources as designed or not at all
  5. Review actions items
  6. <addme>

Action Items:

Ongoing Items:

  • No labels


  1. Frank Brockners I think it is better the ideas/items go to backlogs directly on JIRA and prioritized there. Keeping them in different places (like confluence, JIRA, etherpad, etc.) will make things harder to track.

    Apart from this, some of the items are already in the backlog so asking people to check JIRA and create items there could reduce the duplication.


    1. Fatih Degirmenci - We're on the same page - and JIRA is the right place. I just don't want to lose information when moving to the "clean" way. 
      BTW/ - could you update the filter to show tickets in all projects that carry the INFRA label? That way we also cover Genesis etc. Thanks, Frank

      1. Frank Brockners Updated the filter now and all the JIRA items with INFRA label should be shown in the list. You can click refresh and order by key if GENESIS or other project items do no show up.

        I also sent mail to julien zhang and asked him to put these items to JIRA by passing the link to the version of this page with the ideas he put.

        1. Hi Fatih Degirmenci,

          I have create the JIRA tasks with INFRA label in Releng as you suggested. The content in url(Proposed Improvements) can be deleted. Almost all the tasks and sub-tasks can be done only by admins of Gerrit and JIRA and I just give my suggestions. I also find that Aric Gardner has started to work on some of them.

  2. Hello

    for me, im not sure what has occurred, but it would be good for someone to outline the following:


    • why was it necessary to go through and change all the tickets that belong to another lab owner
    • How come the processes that have been established by lab owners were completely disregarded.
    • What is the expectation of time here vs. effort - the point of JIRA is a tool - not the "b all to end all" for INFRA WG.


    Seems we are regressing a bit to unilateral actions - we had a large discussion about making work for others withoout having adequate discussion and I fail to see why this all had to be done on Friday?