[openstack-dev] [tc] Who is allowed to vote for TC candidates
flavio at redhat.com
Thu Apr 30 10:26:30 UTC 2015
On 30/04/15 12:07 +0300, Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
>On 04/30/15 10:15, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Anyway, I find it curious that the TC is elected by those within the
> developer community but TC candidates talk about representing the operator
> community who are not allowed to vote. Operators meaning Admins,
> Architects, etc. It sounds like this is something most TC candidates want
> which most would agree is a good thing. At least I think so. ; )
> I'm going to nitpick on terminology a bit. The TC is elected by
> *technical contributors*, not developers, as described in the charter:
> I think there is a key misconception in this thread that the TC is
> supposed to represent (or talk about representing) more than just the
> technical contributors that produce OpenStack.
> When the OpenStack Foundation was set up, three bodies of governance
> were established:
> - the Board of Directors (representing the community as a whole)
> - the Technical Committee (representing technical contributors)
> - the User Committee (representing users and ops of OpenStack)
> The Technical Committee mandate is therefore not to represent the users
> and Ops of OpenStack in that setup, it's the role of the User committee.
> If we did include Ops, we would be clearly overstepping our mandate.
>Thierry, essentially I agree with you. I do think though that the disconnect
>between Dev & Ops is an unhealthy situation. Two separate bodies working in two
>different ways with two different agendas is actually very much against the
>current way that most development organizations are aspire towards.
>The TC charter  states.
>" The Technical Committee (“TC”) is tasked with providing the technical
>leadership for OpenStack as a whole (all official projects, as defined below).
>It enforces OpenStack ideals (Openness, Transparency, Commonality, Integration,
>Quality...), decides on issues affecting multiple projects, forms an ultimate
>appeals board for technical decisions, and generally has technical oversight
>over all of OpenStack."
>IMHO, the spirit of the original question that was raised was - how can "all of
>OpenStack" only be those who write the code, and not those that use and operate
>it on a day to day basis?
Are these thoughts based on the current state of OpenStack? or are
they influenced a bit by our past?
The reason I ask is because I believe we've come a long way on
integrating more with Ops and Users. New groups have been created, new
meetups have been run, a dedicated day has been assigned at the
summit, a dedicated mailing list - that most of us follow - has been
created, etc, etc, etc.
I've seen the number of threads to discuss Ops topics increase in
openstack-dev and the influence of Ops - even just points of views
inherited from the feedback we've got - on reviews has gotten better
While I don't consider we're there yet, I do think there have been
several improvements in this area, which is why I'm curious to know
the answer to my questions above.
If it's a matter of having more Ops voting for the TC, we do have a
process in place that we could likely improve. Other than that, I
believe Thierry and Doug have explained perfectly the issues related
to having these 2 groups merged from a *governance* perspective.
> Rather than asking that Ops should be able to elect the TC, you should
> probably start discussing how to improve on the User committee election
> process and visibility.
>It would be great to understand how exactly this was done, what their charter
>is and how much influence they have on technical decisions within the larger
>OpenStack as a whole 
>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the OpenStack-dev