[openstack-dev] [tc] persistently single-vendor projects

Doug Hellmann doug at doughellmann.com
Mon Aug 1 16:25:27 UTC 2016


Excerpts from Michael Krotscheck's message of 2016-08-01 16:06:45 +0000:
> FYI- I'm totally in favor of eviction. But...
> 
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 8:42 AM Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > I'm interested in hearing other reasons that we should keep these
> > sorts of projects, though. I'm not yet ready to propose the change
> > to the policy myself.
> 
> 
> ...if the social consequences result in that entire team's development
> staff effectively exiting OpenStack altogether? This in particular is
> pertinent to myself - if Fuel is evicted from the big tent, then it's very
> likely that the JavaScript SDK collaboration (which includes several
> Fuel-UI developers and has _finally_ taken off) will grind to a halt.
> 
> There's a halo effect to having a project under the big tent - contributors
> are already familiar with infra and procedure, and thus the barriers to
> cross-project bugfixes are way lower. Perhaps (using Fuel as an example)
> the "should this be in the big tent" metric is based on how many
> contributors contribute _only_ to Fuel, as opposed to
> Fuel-and-other-projects.

Remember that the big tent is projects governed by the TC. Projects can
still use gerrit, CI, etc. even if they are not in the big tent.

> As a countersuggestion - perhaps the solution to increasing project
> diversity is to reduce barriers to cross-project contributions. If the
> learning curve of project-shifting was reduced (by agreeing on common web
> frameworks, etc), it'd certainly make cross-project bug fixes way easier.

I certainly support that, though as Jay points out in his thread on the
goals proposal we still want to leave room for experimentation.

Doug



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list