Thanks all!

Sorry for the delay. The renewal/expiry date is June 30, 2025.

I approve

Beyond extensions/skins, we don't currently have a solution to tracking all deployed code like microservices/k8s. I am not sure if that is part of the requirement for this ticket.

I am Derrick's manager and approve his request.

Added Catalyst tag for test environment need/requirement awareness.

I can create a graph in another tool, upload a static image to commons and embed the image into the page. What do you think?

Hello @ppelberg, I've just returned to the office. Let me get check on a couple of items and I'll provide a status this coming week (week of July 24th).

@zeljkofilipin thanks for looking into this. Looks like we're on hold for the time being. We'll loop back around once T334940/T336556 are addressed.

@zeljkofilipin Not sure what happened, but the graphs are no longer present. At some point some of the graphs were removed because they took too much space for the perceived value, but at that time, some of the graphs still seemed to be present. Now they are all gone.

We're going to keep this one open for now as there are some constraints with our current code coverage tooling that keeps us from being able to accomplish this. Services happen to be the ones impacted to most as they aren't necessarily developed using php and javascript, which our tooling is oriented around.

@Aklapper, let me check to see if this is still a relative distinction. It used to be that services (as noted on the developers/maintainers page) were not going through the same pipeline, but that may no longer be the case.

Thanks @Eazeeee. I concur.

Approved

Approved

Approved.

Approved

Manager Approval if needed.

In T247665#8101851, @NancyCole1 wrote:

Uhm, I don't know if google is the best option for storing the insights

+2 approved for @EAkinloose

@EAkinloose or @zeljkofilipin, can either of you take a look?

I have removed myself as the assignee of this task. Once our new software engineer in test starts, I will have them check into this task to see if we should assign ourselves to it again.

Thanks @Aklapper, I believe that the Code Governance Policy being proposed is trying to address the same core problems as the Code Stewardship initiative. Perhaps the appetite for solving this problem has changed, but unless it has, I believe that this policy will also encounter the same hurdles. The Code Stewardship initiative has definitely encountered challenges as of late, but I still believe that the approach is sound.

Hi, I'm working with Derrick to help address the test environment gap. Are there any special environmental needs for this kind of testing? I know that this task speaks specifically of Beta Cluster, but I am wondering if we could satisfy these needs outside of BC.

@LSobanski Approved.

Without seeing this phab task or reading the decision statement I started playing around with https://backstage.io/ and created https://backstage.toolforge.org/ which is currently powered by https://gitlab.wikimedia.org/addshore/backstage

Going to read the doc that is here now

@Jrbranaa perhaps the for-of loop rule should just be disabled.

Yeah, makes sense to me. I'll take a look.

@Majavah - yes, this work has stalled due to a shift in my priorities over the last few months. However, it's back on the "front burner". I think it makes sense for this task to remain open until a plan has been pulled together and published.

@sdkim this is similar/related to T190891. The scope of concern might be a bit different, but it seems to make sense that these should be related. The Canonical Service Catalog work also seem to be very closely related to the Code Stewardship initiative. Probably worth talking a bit about how these efforts could at a minimum be coordinated.

I don't believe there are any additional actions to be taken.

@thcipriani do you think this is something that someone on the RelEng team could build out and possibly host?

@thcipriani do you think this is something that someone on the RelEng team could build out and possibly host?

I think codifying things like this makes sense. I'd like to also explore other potential attributes that could help establish severity. I've given frequency attribute a name - Error Arrival Rate (stolen from Defect Arrival Rate) :-) These may prove to be a bit more difficult to identify and analyze, so we'll need to take that into consideration. In any case, we'll need to figure out how to perform said analysis with minimal impact to the train conductor.

Sorry for the delay in response on this task. The Code Stewardship Review process has definitely run into some snags over the course of the past year as there's been a reduction in our capacity and as a result, an inability to find Code Stewards for many of the outstanding items. That being said, there's been a significant amount of activity and discussion around the topic of Code Stewardship as of late and we will be discussing all of existing orphaned code during our annual planning process over the course of the next several weeks. As a result, I hope to have a path forward for this and other orphaned code in the not-to-distant future.