Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-13682

Flow LDM-503/DM-13510 changes to LDM-564

    XMLWordPrintable

    Details

    • Type: Story
    • Status: Done
    • Resolution: Done
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      In DM-13510 we updated LDM-503 to reflect the current milestone dates from PMCS, and instituted an auto-generation procedure to ensure that it remains up-to-date with minimal manual intervention.

      Unfortunately, this means that the LDM-564 dates are now out of sync with both LDM-503 and PMCS: update it to be consistent, and add some auto-generation here too.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment -

            Updated the ticket branch to use the ME 18-03 schedule.

            Show
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - Updated the ticket branch to use the ME 18-03 schedule.
            Hide
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - - edited

            Some minor comments:

            1.1 Scope

             - 2 full stops in first line

            2.1 Preparation of releases

            • and a machine readable configurations -> configuration or remove ‘a’
            • for deploying these systems on Kubernetes enabled cluster. => either change to 'a Kubernetes' or ‘clusters’

            2.2 This will serve as operational validation of the release => This will serve as an operational validation of the release

            Figure 2 might be easier to read if it were in landscape

            Is LDM-564 Figure 2 not supposed to be the same as LDM-503 Figure 3?

            Show
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - - edited Some minor comments: 1.1 Scope  - 2 full stops in first line 2.1 Preparation of releases and a machine readable configurations -> configuration or remove ‘a’ for deploying these systems on Kubernetes enabled cluster. => either change to 'a Kubernetes' or ‘clusters’ 2.2 This will serve as operational validation of the release => This will serve as an operational validation of the release Figure 2 might be easier to read if it were in landscape Is LDM-564 Figure 2 not supposed to be the same as LDM-503 Figure 3?
            Hide
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment -

            Thanks for the review!

            2 full stops in first line

            Fixed.

            and a machine readable configurations -> configuration or remove ‘a’

            Fixed.

            for deploying these systems on Kubernetes enabled cluster. => either change to 'a Kubernetes' or ‘clusters’

            Fixed.

            This will serve as operational validation of the release => This will serve as an operational validation of the release

            Ok.

            Figure 2 might be easier to read if it were in landscape

            Hmm. I spent a while when I first put this figure together trying to get the formatting right, and this was the best I could come up with. I'm happy to return to it at some point, but I'd rather merge this as-is for now and put that on the back-burner for a rainy day... unless you think we really need to change it now?

            Is LDM-564 Figure 2 not supposed to be the same as LDM-503 Figure 3?

            It should be, yes. However, I only just updated LDM-503 to the ME 18-03 schedule a few minutes ago (on DM-14049), so unless you'd checked the appropriate ticket branch it wouldn't have been. The figure in 564 on this ticket now matches 503 master.

            Show
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - Thanks for the review! 2 full stops in first line Fixed. and a machine readable configurations -> configuration or remove ‘a’ Fixed. for deploying these systems on Kubernetes enabled cluster. => either change to 'a Kubernetes' or ‘clusters’ Fixed. This will serve as operational validation of the release => This will serve as an operational validation of the release Ok. Figure 2 might be easier to read if it were in landscape Hmm. I spent a while when I first put this figure together trying to get the formatting right, and this was the best I could come up with. I'm happy to return to it at some point, but I'd rather merge this as-is for now and put that on the back-burner for a rainy day... unless you think we really need to change it now? Is LDM-564 Figure 2 not supposed to be the same as LDM-503 Figure 3? It should be, yes. However, I only just updated LDM-503 to the ME 18-03 schedule a few minutes ago (on DM-14049 ), so unless you'd checked the appropriate ticket branch it wouldn't have been. The figure in 564 on this ticket now matches 503 master .
            Hide
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment -

            Fine to return to the figure layout at a later date - this is not a showstopper.  I did not look at the ticket branch - that explains the difference. 

             

            Show
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - Fine to return to the figure layout at a later date - this is not a showstopper.  I did not look at the ticket branch - that explains the difference.   
            Hide
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment -

            Thank you! Merged.

            Show
            swinbank John Swinbank added a comment - Thank you! Merged.

              People

              Assignee:
              swinbank John Swinbank
              Reporter:
              swinbank John Swinbank
              Reviewers:
              Leanne Guy
              Watchers:
              John Swinbank, Leanne Guy, Wil O'Mullane
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              3 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: