This thread seems to discuss many things. I’d suggest split that into separate topics and potentially working groups that would discuss, suggest and commit to work on respective changes. At this point it seems everyone wants the change. This great thread reminds me some discussions we had in the past. To avoid repeating it again in 6 months, we need to take some action. I’ll reuse good summary from @John_Mitsch and will summarize information I’ve seen here or elsewhere about existing efforts so people can join if they feel they can help in some area.
- documentation - I think people interested in this can join @lzap, @mcorr and @bbuckingham who are actively working on improvements in this area, while there may be work outside of foreman-documentation, this sounds like a group of interest already
- installer - @ekohl experiments in this area, I know @ehelms spent some time thinking about this too, if people are interested, I suggest reach out to them, two possible paths forward are keep tech and refactor, change tech but also limit capabilities of the installer but there may be much more to explore
- webui - any change in here will lead to a discussion about changing existing UI or build a new separately, I think we got to a point it’s worth PoC of new standalone UI and see how that would work and if we’re missing something, what’s possible to achieve in reasonable time and what the impact would be to existing plugins and tests, in fact @Ron_Lavi I believe suggests that at Upgrading to Patternfly 4 in Foreman, perhaps new thread should be created on this topic, it may be broken to more subtopics too (page redesign, separate repo, new tech, pf4 etc)
- improve tests - there’s already a working group and suggestion at E2E and functional testing meeting notes, thanks @John_Mitsch, @amirfefer, @ekohl, and @Roman_Plevka, I believe any help is welcome, reach out if you’re interested
- scope - I think @tbrisker did a great job of reducing things in 2.0. I read in this topic, some puppet functionality is also a good candidate. I know @tbrisker is long term working on reducing number of settings, simplifying org/locs. Recently we also talked about pages such as hw models, statistics, trends which are probably not used much. Let’s propose dropping/extracting them in community survery. I think reducing complexity also belongs to here, e.g. our over complicated permission system, multitenancy model etc can be simplified if we sacrifice some fucntionality. Tomer, if you want help with this, count me in. If you’d like to create some king of a group of interest, please let me know where I can join.
There’s a big chance I’ve missed some other ongoing efforts, please share what you’re working on, so we can see where we can cooperate and mvoe on. If you’re not involved yet but would like to join any of the topic above, hopefully the list of nicks helps.