Re: [BuildStream] Proposal: new subgroup - "services" and new repo - "infrastructure"

[Tristan Van Berkom <tristan vanberkom codethink co uk>]

On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 13:32 +0100, Agustín Benito Bethencourt via
BuildStream-list wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the question about where to open a ticket for infrastructure related
> topics at BuildStream arise this week. The following options were
> evaluated:
>
> 1. Create an issue in buildstream repo.
> 2. Create a new repo on nosoftware subgroup called infrastructure.
> 3. Create a new subgroup "services" and create there a repo called
> infrastructure.
>
> In my experience, mixing services and product development under the
> same structure (ticketing system, boards, label, etc) creates
> friction over time. I advice against option 1. Nowadays, IaaS has
> become a thing so managing infrastructure involves code, manifests,
> apps... Because of this I advice against option 2.
>
> In order to be able to adapt the Gitlab structure to the DevOps
> nature of managing the infrastructure, without affecting the "product
> development" structure we currently have, Gitlab propose to create
> subgroups, which allows some level of "structure isolation". This
> argument (isolation) lead to the creation of "nosoftware" which is
> working well, in my opinion. This is why I propose option 3. 
>
> This subgroup will also allow us to create repos (projects) to manage
> other services/application in the future. 

+1 option 3 from me.

We have have various infra related issues over time which led to the
creation of the "Infrastructure" label, it would be nice to not have
this in the issue tracker related to BuildStream codebase, though.

Cheers,
    -Tristan