Re: Moving lava-docker out of the KernelCI GitHub organisation

["Corentin Labbe" <clabbe@baylibre.com>]

Le Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 01:33:37PM +0900, Alice Ferrazzi a écrit :
> On Thu, Sep 1, 2022 at 11:56 PM Remi Duraffort <remi.duraffort@linaro.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > Le lun. 29 août 2022 à 08:18, Alice Ferrazzi <
> alice.ferrazzi@miraclelinux.com> a écrit :
> >>
> >> Hello Antonio,
> >>
> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2022 at 3:40 AM Antonio Terceiro
> >> <antonio.terceiro@linaro.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 04:05:47PM +0200, Guillaume Tucker wrote:
> >> > > Hello,
> >> > >
> >> > > The idea of adding BayLibre's lava-healthchecks-binary[1]
> >> > > repository to the KernelCI GitHub organisation was brought up
> >> > > during a KernelCI weekly meeting last month.  This appears to be
> >> > > related to the lava-docker[2] project which is currently in the
> >> > > KernelCI organisation, to bring the two repositories together.
> >> > >
> >> > > It seems to me that lava-docker and anything related to providing
> >> > > LAVA support is not something that KernelCI should be responsible
> >> > > for as a project.  In fact, the lava-docker repository has been
> >> > > managed entirely autonomously since the beginning by different
> >> > > maintainers than the core KernelCI repositories, and I believe it
> >> > > was originally added to the KernelCI org by Kevin as it was an
> >> > > easy thing to do that made sense at the time.
> >> > >
> >> > > Rather than having one more LAVA-related project under this org,
> >> > > how about either creating a dedicated GitHub organisation for
> >> > > lava-docker and related repositories, or adding lava-docker and
> >> > > the healthchecks to the LAVA GitLab instance on
> >> > > https://git.lavasoftware.org/?
> >> > >
> >> > > Having a dedicated org on GitHub would give the actual
> >> > > maintainers of the project full control over it, to add and move
> >> > > repositories, manage members, permissions etc. as they wish.
> >> > >
> >> > > However, if the LAVA maintainers think that lava-docker could
> >> > > become the main solution for running LAVA in Docker, then maybe
> >> > > it should be merged with some existing project on
> >> > > git.lavasoftware.org or added as a new project there.  That would
> >> > > give it more visibility and potentially remove duplicated
> >> > > efforts.
> >> >
> >> > FWIW, there is also
> >> > https://git.lavasoftware.org/lava/pkg/docker-compose which seems
> >> > similar, but not the same, as kernelci's lava-docker (e.g. there is no
> >> > autogeneration of config files AFAICT). That's used by a few people,
> but
> >> > mostly for development purposes I think.
> >> >
> >>
> >> yes, from what I could see is a different approach.
> >> We are offering a orchestration system that is generated
> >> programmatically by a yaml file (boards.yaml)
> >> that is creating the necessary docker-compose settings and unloading
> >> the already set up lava
> >> files and folders.
> >>
> >> > > I'm not sure I'm aware of all the implications for each of these
> >> > > options so I thought I would bring it up for discussion here.
> >> > > What do you think?
> >> >
> >> > I don't really have an opinion on what to do with lava-docker. In
> >> > principle, consolidation and collaboration is good, but we would need
> to
> >> > agree on the details. Also, moving it around must be done in a way that
> >> > the current maintainers still have the necessary access to keep
> >> > maintaining it (because the move won't make new maintainers magically
> >> > appear).
> >>
> >> I agree on doing it in a way that the current maintainers have still
> >> the necessary access rights for continue
> >> the development,
> >> I also would like to do it in a way that the current lava-docker users
> >> don't get confused on
> >> where the upstream repository moved to.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Alice

Hello

Sorry I am late to came in conversation.

I agree that lava-docker is probably not hosted in the right place now.
The only relation between the 2 project was that lava-docker was designed to help doing a LAVA lab for people wanting to join kernelCI
So I agree to move it out of kernelCI if it si necessary.

lava-docker has few users, so it will be easy to warn them. (I know AGL, GkernelCI, Baylibre, lab-broonie as real users, not sure if the other still use it).

For the moment I am the only maintainer, but if Alice want to step in, it will be good.

I will wait for Khilman to said the final words.