New Validated Patterns tiers #352
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
This is an automated message: You can preview this docs PR at http://352.docs-pr.validatedpatterns.io |
abhatt-rh
force-pushed
the
pr-319
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8c9a0ef
to
89616bc
Compare
beekhof
reviewed
Nov 1, 2023
content/learn/tested.adoc
Outdated
| * A {tested} pattern must be meaningful without specialized hardware, including flavors of architectures not explicitly supported. | ||
| + | ||
| Qualification is a {solution-name-upstream} TOC decision with input from the pattern owner. | ||
| //AI: What's TOC? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Technical Oversight Committee
beekhof
reviewed
Nov 1, 2023
content/learn/tested.adoc
Outdated
| //AI: What's TOC? | ||
| * A {tested} pattern must have their implementation reviewed by the patterns team to ensure that it is sufficiently flexible to function across a variety of platforms, customer environments, and any relevant verticals. | ||
| * A {tested} pattern must include a standardized architecture drawing, created with (or at least conforming to) the PAC tooling | ||
| //AI: What's PAC |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Portfolio Architecture Council
beekhof
reviewed
Nov 1, 2023
content/learn/tested.adoc
Outdated
| Qualification is a {solution-name-upstream} TOC decision with input from the pattern owner. | ||
| //AI: What's TOC? | ||
| * A {tested} pattern must have their implementation reviewed by the patterns team to ensure that it is sufficiently flexible to function across a variety of platforms, customer environments, and any relevant verticals. | ||
| * A {tested} pattern must include a standardized architecture drawing, created with (or at least conforming to) the PAC tooling |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
| * A {tested} pattern must include a standardized architecture drawing, created with (or at least conforming to) the PAC tooling | |
| * A {tested} pattern must include a standardized architecture drawing, created with (or at least conforming to) the standard Patterns tooling |
beekhof
reviewed
Nov 3, 2023
content/learn/implementation.adoc
Outdated
| . Patterns must be useful without all content stored in private Git repositories. | ||
| . Patterns must include a list of names and versions of all the products and projects that the pattern consumes. | ||
| . Patterns must be useful without any sample applications that are private or that lack public sources. | ||
| //AI:why application was styled that way |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was probably using it as a Noun elsewhere in the list
abhatt-rh
force-pushed
the
pr-319
branch
3 times, most recently
from
60420bf
to
4cbcd96
Compare
|
/lgtm |
|
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
abhatt-rh
changed the title
content/learn/tested.adoc
Outdated
Comment on lines
56
to
66
| + | ||
| //TODO: Convert above link to adoc |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the plus sign here necessary due to the next line being a comment?
…ut certain verbiage
|
Ignoring the html test errors. These seem to for the renamed files and are sort of false positive. Raised an query with the htmltest repo. Not holding merge for this |
abhatt-rh
commented
Nov 20, 2023
| * A {maintained} pattern must be tested on all currently supported {rh-ocp} extended update support (EUS) releases. | ||
| * A {maintained} pattern must fix breakage in timely manner. | ||
| * A {maintained} pattern must document their support policy. | ||
| + |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, all the list continuation (+) here are required because they are a continuation on the support policy and statement.
content/learn/tested.adoc
Outdated
| * A {tested} pattern must include a test plan covering all features or attributes being highlighted by the demonstration guide. Negative flow tests (such as resiliency or data retention in the presence of network outages) are also limited to scenarios covered by the demonstration guide. | ||
| + | ||
| The test plan must define how to validate if the pattern has been successfully deployed and is functionally operational. | ||
| Example: https://docs.google.com/document/d/12KQhdzjVIsxRURTnWAckiEMB3_96oWBjtlTXi1q73cg/view[Validating an Industrial Edge Deployment] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, we don't. It renders as interned since it's seen as ventilated prose
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Based on #319
Issue: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/TELCODOCS-1521
Preview: http://352.docs-pr.validatedpatterns.io/learn/workflow/