Open Stack

On 03/01/2014 06:30 PM, John Griffith wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> I just wanted to send out a quick note on a topic that came up recently.
>  Unfortunately the folks that I'd like to read this most; don't
> participate on the ML typically, but I'd at least like to raise some
> community awareness.
> 
> We all know OpenStack is growing at a rapid pace and has a lot of
> promise, so much so that there's an enormous field of vendors and OS
> distributions that are focusing a lot of effort and marketing on the
> project.
> 
> Something that came up recently in the Cinder project is that one of the
> backend device vendors wasn't happy with a feature that somebody was
> working on and contributed a patch for.  Instead of providing a
> meaningful review and suggesting alternatives to the patch they set up
> meetings with other vendors leaving the active members of the community
> out and picked things apart in their own format out of the public view.
>  Nobody from the core Cinder team was involved in these discussions or
> meetings (at least that I've been made aware of).
> 
> I don't want to go into detail about who, what, where etc at this point.
>  I instead, I want to point out that in my opinion this is no way to
> operate in an Open Source community.  Collaboration is one thing, but
> ambushing other peoples work is entirely unacceptable in my opinion.
>  OpenStack provides a plethora of ways to participate and voice your
> opinion, whether it be this mailing list, the IRC channels which are
> monitored daily and also host a published weekly meeting for most
> projects.  Of course when in doubt you're welcome to send me an email at
> any time with questions or concerns that you have about a patch.  In any
> case however the proper way to address concerns about a submitted patch
> is to provide a review for that patch.

Honestly, while I realize you don't want to name names, I actually want
to know about bad actors in our community. Because I think that if bad
actors aren't exposed, then they tend to keep up the bad behavior.

Social pressure is important here.

> Everybody has a voice and the ability to participate, and the most
> effective way to do that is by thorough, timely and constructive code
> reviews.
> 
> I'd also like to point out that while a number of companies and vendors
> have fancy taglines like "The Leaders of OpenStack", they're not.
>  OpenStack is a community effort, as of right now there is no company
> that leads or runs OpenStack.  If you have issues or concerns on the
> development side you need to take those up with the development
> community, not vendor xyz.

+1

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
Samsung Research America
sean at dague.net / sean.dague at samsung.com
http://dague.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140302/a20e3b9a/attachment.pgp>