docs: add OEP-45/decision-0003 - #807
Conversation
openedx-webhooks
added
open-source-contribution
|
Thanks for the pull request, @gabor-boros! This repository is currently maintained by Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review. 🔘 Get product approvalIf you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.
🔘 Provide contextTo help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:
🔘 Get a green buildIf one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green. DetailsWhere can I find more information?If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources: When can I expect my changes to be merged?Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible. However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:
💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR. |
d4a461f to
34c0297
Compare
Signed-off-by: Gabor Boros <gabor@opencraft.com>
Signed-off-by: Gabor Boros <gabor@opencraft.com>
Signed-off-by: Gabor Boros <gabor@opencraft.com>
Co-authored-by: Braden MacDonald <mail@bradenm.com>
Signed-off-by: Gabor Boros <gabor@opencraft.com>
Signed-off-by: Gabor Boros <gabor@opencraft.com>
34c0297 to
a9dd737
Compare
|
@felipemontoya Comments are addressed. Could you please take a second look as well as @bradenmacdonald? |
| The `Large Instances Working Group`_, mostly consist of the members of commercial providers, maintains the Terraform modules and Helm chart described in decision 0002, as well as the growing ecosystem of related open-source deployment tools. | ||
|
|
||
| For operators deploying Open edX on Kubernetes, these resources (`Drydock`_, `Picasso`_, `ArgoCD`_, `Argo Workflows`_ and `GitHub Actions`_) provide flexible reference architectures. | ||
| We recognize that Open edX deployments vary widely in scale and infrastructure. Operators are free to blend these community tools with their own existing stack, and we encourage providers to share new deployment code, modules, or templates with the community. | ||
|
|
||
| Because Open edX intentionally supports diverse infrastructure needs, none of these tools are mandatory. Instead, the community focuses its efforts on ensuring these reference implementations and provider templates like OpenCraft's `Launchpad`_, are maintained to serve as reliable blueprints. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this needs to be re-phrased as a decision. Right now it is just describing things that exist, which is not really what a Decision Record is for. Can we move the descriptive parts into the "Context" section and make sure the "Decision" part has a clear decision? (Even if it's "we will not prescribe a specific deployment orchestration strategy at this time, but...")
5 participants
This PR updates OEP-45 and adds a new, decision 0003 to give recommendation on large Open edX deployments.