Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Process for decommissioning short-lived hubs #171

Closed
2 tasks
sgibson91 opened this issue Jul 23, 2021 · 8 comments · Fixed by 2i2c-org/infrastructure#700
Closed
2 tasks

Process for decommissioning short-lived hubs #171

sgibson91 opened this issue Jul 23, 2021 · 8 comments · Fixed by 2i2c-org/infrastructure#700
Assignees
Labels
Task Actions that don't involve changing our code or docs.

Comments

@sgibson91
Copy link
Member

Summary

For hubs we deploy for a short-term, such as to support workshops and conferences, we should have a decommission process that checks-in with the Community Representative/Hub Admins that removing the hub is ok, any data from NFS servers they'd like to keep is migrated, and the hub is gracefully removed.

Actions

  • Decide and document how hubs should be decommissioned, including migrating data if required
  • Create an issue template/form that tracks the decommission process and communications with Hub Representatives/Admins
@sgibson91 sgibson91 added 🏷️ team-process Task Actions that don't involve changing our code or docs. labels Jul 23, 2021
@choldgraf
Copy link
Member

100% this is a process improvement we should work out!

I've moved this to "needs discussion" so that it's clear this one needs more conversation and thinking before we move forward. Does that make sense?

@sgibson91
Copy link
Member Author

The end date for the COESSING workshop hub is Aug 31 so this would be a good opportunity to draft a process/issue template and get feedback on it

@sgibson91
Copy link
Member Author

While we may not actually be decommissioning the COESSING hub, I wanted to get feedback on the checklist I put together in 2i2c-org/infrastructure#679 (comment) Does this feel like a good first pass and an issue template to track such tasks?

@damianavila
Copy link
Contributor

Does this feel like a good first pass and an issue template to track such tasks?

YES.

@choldgraf
Copy link
Member

agreed - I like that list quite a lot - I suspect that many hubs will have a similar response, so we should definitely explicitly ask them. This will often be an opportunity to convert single-use hub communities into longer-term communities! (obviously, it would be great if they'd be paying us as well 😅)

@sgibson91
Copy link
Member Author

Ok, will try and open a PR soon

@sgibson91
Copy link
Member Author

I have opened 2i2c-org/infrastructure#699

@sgibson91
Copy link
Member Author

sgibson91 commented Sep 22, 2021

Closed 2i2c-org/infrastructure#699 in favour of 2i2c-org/infrastructure#700 which was created by following the workflow here: https://docs.github.com/en/communities/using-templates-to-encourage-useful-issues-and-pull-requests/configuring-issue-templates-for-your-repository#creating-issue-templates

This is because I noticed our "Hub Incident" template doesn't show up on the "New Issue" page and I'm wondering if it's because it was configured using the legacy workflow (where "legacy workflow" is "just add a markdown file manually"). If we merge 2i2c-org/infrastructure#700 and everything works, I will update the hub incident template too.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Task Actions that don't involve changing our code or docs.
Projects
None yet
3 participants