Hybrid Cloud Patterns

Validated Pattern Requirements


  • What are they: Technical foundations, backed by CI, that have succeeded in the market and Red Hat expects to be repeatable across customers and segments.
  • Purpose: Reduce risk, accelerate sales cycles, and allow consulting organizations to be more effective.
  • Creator: The Validated Patterns team in conjunction with: Partners, GSIs, Services/Consultants, SAs, and other Red Hat teams

Onboarding Existing Implementations

The Validated Patterns team has a preference for empowering other, and not taking credit for their work.

Where there is an existing application/demo, there is also a strong preference for the originating team to own any changes that are needed for the implementation to become a validated pattern. Alternatively, if the Validated Patterns team drives the conversion, then in order to prevent confusion and duplicated efforts, we are likely to ask for a commitment to phase out use of the previous implementation for future engagements such as demos, presentations, and workshops.

The goal is to avoid bringing a parallel implementation into existence which divides Red Hat resources, and creates confusion internally and with customers as the implementations drift apart.

In both scenarios the originating team can choose where to host the primary repository, will be given admin permissions to any fork in https://github.com/hybrid-cloud-patterns, and will receive on-going assistance from the Validated Patterns team.

Nominating a Community Pattern to become Validated

If there is a community pattern that you believe would be a good candidate for becoming validated, please email hybrid-cloud-patterns@googlegroups.com at least 4 weeks prior to the end of a given quarter in order for the necessary work to be considered as part of the following quarter’s planning process.

Please be aware that each Validated Pattern represents an ongoing maintenance, support, and CI effort. Finite team capacity means we must critically balance this cost against the potential customer opportunity. A “no” or “not yet” result is not intended as an insult against the pattern or its author.


Validated Patterns have deliverable and requirements in addition to those specified for Community-level patterns


  1. Validated Patterns MUST contain more than two RH products. Alternative: Engage with the BU

  2. Validated Patterns, or the solution on which they are based, MUST have been deployed and approved for use in at least one customer environment.

    Alternative: Community Pattern

  3. Validated Patterns MUST be meaningful without specialized hardware, including flavors of architectures not explicitly supported. Alternative: Engage with DCI

    Qualification is a Validated Patterns engineering decision with input from the pattern owner.

  4. Validated Patterns MUST be broadly applicable. Alternative: Engage with Phased Gate and/or TAMs

    Qualification is a Validated Patterns PM decision with input from the pattern owner.

  5. Validated Patterns MUST only make use of Red Hat products that are already fully supported by their product team(s).

  6. Validated Patterns MUST NOT rely on functionality in tech-preview, or hidden behind feature gates.

  7. Validated Patterns MUST conform to the same Community-level implementation requirements

  8. Validated Patterns MUST have their architectures reviewed by the PM, TPM, or TMM of each Red Hat product they consume to ensure consistency with the product teams’ intentions and roadmaps

  9. Validated Patterns 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.

  10. Validated Patterns MUST include a standardized architecture drawing, created with (or at least conforming to) the PAC tooling

  11. Validated Patterns MUST include a presentation deck oriented around the business problem being solved and intended for use by the field to sell and promote the solution

  12. Validated Patterns MUST include a recorded demo highlighting the business problem and how the pattern solves it

  13. Validated Patterns MUST include a test plan covering all features or attributes being highlighted by the demo that also spans multiple products. Negative flow tests (such as resiliency or data retention in the presence of network outages) are limited to scenarios covered by the demonstration script.

  14. Validated Patterns MUST include automated CI testing that runs on every change to the pattern, or a schedule no less frequently than once per week

  15. Validated Patterns MUST create a new point release of the validation-level deliverables when minor versions (e.g. “12” in OpenShift 4.12) of consumed products change

  16. Validated Patterns MUST document their support policy

    The individual products used in a Validated Pattern are backed by the full Red Hat support experience conditional on the customer’s subscription to those products, and the individual products’ support policy. Additional components in a Validated Pattern that are not supported by Red Hat (e.g. Hashicorp Vault, and Seldon Core) will require a customer to obtain support from that vendor directly. The validated patterns team is very motivated to address any problems in the VP Operator, as well as problems in the common helm charts, but cannot not offer any SLAs at this time. See also our standard disclaimer

  17. Validated Patterns DO NOT imply an obligation of support for partner or community operators by Red Hat.


  1. Validated Patterns SHOULD focus on functionality not performance.

  2. Validated Patterns SHOULD trigger CI runs for new versions of consumed products

  3. Validated Patterns SHOULD provide an RHPDS lab environment

    A bare bones environment into which the solution can be deployed, and a list of instructions for doing so (e.g. installing and configuring OpenShift GitOps)

  4. Validated Patterns SHOULD provide pre-built demo environment using RHPDS

    Having an automated demo within the RHPDS system, that will be built based on the current stable version that is run against the CI testing system

  5. Validated Patterns SHOULD track deployments of each validation-level deliverable

    For lifecycle decisions like discontinuing support of a version For notification if problems are found in our CI


  1. Teams creating Validated Patterns CAN provide their own SLA

    A document for QE that defines, at a technical level, how to validate if the pattern has been successfully deployed and is functionally operational. Example: Validating an Industrial Edge Deployment