This is a documentation bug for this section in OCP 4.6 documentation: https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.6/storage/container_storage_interface/persistent-storage-csi-ovirt.html 1. We need to remove mentioning of oVirt. Since oVirt is an upstream product and we should not mix it with RHV, which a RedHat supported product, that we refer to in this document (at least to my understanding). Replace everywhere: "Red Hat Virtualization (oVirt)" With: "Red Hat Virtualization (RHV)" 2. We propose a new name (in agreement with RHV PM and TMM, Peter and Andrew) for this chapter and feature: Instead: "Red Hat Virtualization (oVirt) CSI Driver Operator" Use: "CSI provisioner for OpenShift on RHV" P.S. I am not sure though if we should stop calling the driver ovirt, because I think it is legit, similar to how we do it with ansible: https://cloud.redhat.com/ansible/automation-hub/redhat/rhv/docs So, if we follow this logic, we can keep ovirt in names like "oVirt CSI Driver Operator".
We also need to add a section on how to create a PVC on with the CSI driver, what we support and so on
Red Hat Virtualization oVirt CSI Driver Operator -> need to change 'oVirt' to 'ovirt'
Just to make things clearer, The name of the driver the thing that gets installed is "ovirt-csi-driver" it is not a question of upstream or downstream - that is the name of the component I voted to change that to: "Red Hat Virtualization oVirt CSI Driver Operator" because "Red Hat Virtualization" is the product and "oVirt CSI Driver Operator" is the component that we are installing in openshift... Regarding oVirt' vs 'ovirt' I think that we write oVirt when we talk about the product oVirt regarding the driver I really don't care... it can go either way as long as in our examples its 'ovirt' (which in the current state of the PR it is so don't change that :D )
I see that Marina suggest this Instead: "Red Hat Virtualization (oVirt) CSI Driver Operator" Use: "CSI provisioner for OpenShift on RHV" if it is ok by you Gal that the title is Red Hat Virtualization oVirt CSI Driver Operator I will close this ticket thanks, Michal
(In reply to michal from comment #13) > I see that Marina suggest this > Instead: > "Red Hat Virtualization (oVirt) CSI Driver Operator" > Use: > "CSI provisioner for OpenShift on RHV" > > if it is ok by you Gal that the title is Red Hat Virtualization oVirt CSI > Driver Operator > I will close this ticket > thanks, > Michal Removing the brackets around ovirt in the title - looks better already, since we are not mixing RHV and oVirt. However, to me still sounds like having the title changed to more RHV oriented, as I proposed: "CSI provisioner for OpenShift on RHV", and then referring to the ovirt operator in the text looks better. Since, as we all say, the name of the operator is ovirt based. And in the text, we are going to elaborate about how this CSI provisioner is going to work, and it is via "ovirt-csi-driver". We need to distinguish between oVirt the product (vs RHV) and ovirt in package name, that we are using in the RHV product for CSI provision of OpenShift. I hope this clarifies.
Currently (4.6) the titles are: - AWS Elastic Block Store CSI Driver Operator - OpenStack Manila CSI Driver Operator - Red Hat Virtualization (oVirt) CSI Driver Operator I think we need to align with that and "CSI provisioner for OpenShift on RHV" is not aligen with the rest of the providers... BTW, it is openshift docs so I would change your suggestion to "CSI provisioner for RHV" ;)
After chatting with Marina and Eric, the title should be consistent with the other examples, so I suggest: Red Hat Virtualization CSI Driver Operator
Marina and Eric and Michelle Bearer think that the title should be : "Red Hat Virtualization CSI Driver Operator" and Gal thinks: "CSI provisioner for RHV" who are going to decide? :)
- @mgold Eli needed to merge this PR today to make the OCP 4.7 release. This content will be merged and released shortly after the 4.7 GA release because we missed the build freeze. We will use Red Hat Virtualization CSI Driver Operator to be consistent with titles in the documentation. - @gzaidman if you feel strongly that the title should be changed to CSI provisioner for RHV, please gain consensus from the program team and open a new bug for docs. - @emarcus Please update the title to Red Hat Virtualization CSI Driver Operator and merge the content. Please let then OCP merger know that this content belong to 4.7 and should be updated as part of the continuous update process.
Hi if you look at c#15 I said that we should align with the other products and voted against "CSI provisioner for OpenShift on RHV"/"CSI provisioner for RHV" I agree with "Red Hat Virtualization CSI Driver Operator"
Great that we are in agreement. Thanks everyone contributing. I believe the biggest confusion was between RHV and oVirt as 2 product mixed in one title, and we are over it now. I advise to review the rest of the text as well and fix the text accordingly. It is ok to use package name that starts with ovirt-*. But it is not ok to refer to RHV and oVirt as one, especially in RedHat downstream documentation.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory (Moderate: OpenShift Container Platform 4.7.0 security, bug fix, and enhancement update), and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2020:5633
Hm, I am confused. It still looks the same in OCP 4.7 docs: https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.7/storage/container_storage_interface/persistent-storage-csi-ovirt.html.
https://docs.openshift.com/container-platform/4.7/storage/container_storage_interface/persistent-storage-csi-ovirt.html#ovirt-csi-driver-storage-class_persistent-storage-csi-ovirt