| ... | ... | @@ -2,7 +2,17 @@ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ELT Platform 24 - Retrospection
|
|
|
|
===============================
|
|
|
|
Work on ELT Platform 24 give us real life experience on initial version of ELT Platform's lifecycle and usage of Open Build Service (OBS). Base on that on that a new version ELT Platform Lifecycle was created.
|
|
|
|
Work on ELT Platform 24 give us real life experience on initial version of ELT Platform's lifecycle and usage of Open Build Service (OBS). Base on that on that a new version ELT Platform Lifecycle is proposed. Following weakness of the previous workflow were identified:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Decision about updates approval have too many stakeholders.
|
|
|
|
* Putting an update into ELT Platform requires approval from too many parties. It makes the process
|
|
|
|
long, heavy and discourage developers for providing fixes via official channels.
|
|
|
|
* New workflow limits number of stakeholders to developers responsible for Public and CCS releases.
|
|
|
|
The hope is that less stakeholders can make decisions faster and process will be more agile.
|
|
|
|
* Three phases of software lifecycle: unstable, stabilizing and stable were not respected.
|
|
|
|
* The incentive to have "own" branch/fork of Platform is too high.
|
|
|
|
* End Of Life Policy is not well defined.
|
|
|
|
* Platform/ECOS/DevEnv versioning is unclear and often mixed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ELT Platform Lifecycle
|
| ... | ... | |
