Open Stack

On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 12:59 +0300, Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
> Again my apologies for the incorrect format - since I am still not
> receiving the messages from this thread.

let me know if you want me to investigate this further.

> Doug - evidently this is not working as it should. As Chris said as
> well - the posts are not tagged and are not regular. 

I'd like to move the conversation to practical examples because in
theory we all agree that communication is key and can be improved.

In practice, that's hard and it's better to talk about specific
examples.

> They were not noticed - because they didn't really happen.
> 
I sense that they happened until there were things fairly easy to
communicate. Are there been significant discussions in TC meetings? Yes,
the big tent and the accompanying tag system is the only one I can think
of. Were they worth a blog post? Yes. Was that blog post easy to write?
No because the topic has been under development for quite some time with
not enough clear roadmap to write a summary for wider consumption. If a
blog post comes out saying something half-baked over a change so
important, the TC members will be distracted by noise from people not
involved enough to understand the challenges. There is always a fine
balance to strike between being open and being effective.

Considering that all TC members are volunteers with day jobs, get busier
and busier as the release approaches, I'm really not surprised that the
TC has scheduled time to present the progress on the 'big tent' and tags
in person at events (the operators summit in PHL) and in Vancouver.

IMHO the topic is getting clear enough to be summarized in 500-700 words
blog post only in the past weeks... 

The thing is that tags and big tent have been discussed widely *outside*
of the TC, I think nobody interested in the OpenStack governance issues
may have missed the fact that such conversation was happening. They may
have missed the *details* but not missed the existence of the
conversation itself.

what other topic has the TC discussed and decided upon that have you not
seen announced?

> If the audience that you are planning on communicating with is: not
> the developers themselves and those who are already heavily involved
> in the community - I think this certainly is not the place to
> publicize changes. Do you seriously expect people who are trying to
> find information (not as a regular code contributor) about what is
> going on to start delving through Gerrit? 

Maybe we should document better how to get notifications of new
discussions on the governance repository. I could also start including
the proposals pending for review in the newsletter so people can at
least skim through the commit titles weekly.

If you check the latest changes though you'll see how much of that is
really not important:

https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/governance,n,z

the important ones I find in 2015:
https://review.openstack.org/150604 Add the release naming process
https://review.openstack.org/159930 Add IRC channel policies

a few new project teams added and the tag-stuff, like

https://review.openstack.org/145740 Move from program-based structure to
project-based
https://review.openstack.org/149961 Introduce tag attributes
https://review.openstack.org/145734 Add template for project taxonomy
tags definition

/stef