[openstack-dev] [tc] persistently single-vendor projects
Steven Dake (stdake)
stdake at cisco.com
Tue Aug 2 15:45:24 UTC 2016
On 8/2/16, 8:13 AM, "Hayes, Graham" <graham.hayes at hpe.com> wrote:
>On 02/08/2016 15:42, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>> On 01/08/16 10:19 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
>>> On 08/01/2016 09:58 AM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>>>> Thierry, Ben, Doug,
>>>> How can we distinguish between. "Project is doing the right thing, but
>>>> others are not joining" vs "Project is actively trying to keep people
>>> I think at some level, it's not really that different. If we treat them
>>> as different, everyone will always believe they did all the right
>>> things, but got no results. 3 cycles should be plenty of time to drop
>>> single entity contributions below 90%. That means prioritizing bugs /
>>> patches from outside groups (to drop below 90% on code commits),
>>> mentoring every outside member that provides feedback (to drop below
>>> on reviews), shifting development resources towards mentoring / docs /
>>> on ramp exercises for others in the community (to drop below 90% on
>>> Digging out of a single vendor status is hard, and requires making that
>>> your top priority. If teams aren't interested in putting that ahead of
>>> development work, that's fine, but that doesn't make it a sustainable
>>> OpenStack project.
>> ++ to the above! I don't think they are that different either and we
>> need to differentiate them after all.
>I do have one question - how are teams getting out of
>"team:single-vendor" and towards "team:diverse-affiliation" ?
>We have tried to get more people involved with Designate using the ways
>we know how - doing integrations with other projects, pushing designate
>at conferences, helping DNS Server vendors to add drivers, adding
>drivers for DNS Servers and service providers ourselves, adding
>features - the lot.
>We have a lot of user interest (41% of users were interested in using
>us), and are quite widely deployed for a non tc-approved-release
>project (17% - 5% in production). We are actually the most deployed
>non tc-approved-release project.
>We still have 81% of the reviews done by 2 companies, and 83% by 3
By the objective criteria of team:single-vendor Designate isn't a single
vendor project. By the objective criteria of team:diverse-affiliation
your not a diversely affiliated project either. This is why I had
suggested we need a third tag which accurately represents where Designate
is in its community building journey.
>I know our project is not "cool", and DNS is probably one of the most
>boring topics, but I honestly believe that it has a place in the
>majority of OpenStack clouds - both public and private. We are a small
>team of people dedicated to making Designate the best we can, but are
>still one company deciding to drop OpenStack / DNS development from
>joining the single-vendor party.
Agree Designate is important to OpenStack. But IMO it is not a single
vendor project as defined by the criteria given the objective statistics
you mentioned above.
>We are definitely interested in putting community development ahead of
>development work - but what that actual work is seems to difficult to
>nail down. I do feel sometimes that I am flailing in the dark trying to
Fantastic its a high-prioiirty goal. Sad to hear your struggling but
struggling is part of the activity.
>If projects could share how that got out of single-vendor or into
>diverse-affiliation this could really help teams progress in the
>community, and avoid being removed.
You bring up a fantastic point here - and that is that teams need to share
techniques for becoming multi-vendor and some day diversely affiliated. I
am a super busy atm, or I would volunteer to lead a cross-project effort
with PTLs to coordinate community building from our shared knowledge pool
of expert Open Source contributors in the wider OpenStack community.
That said, I am passing the baton for Kolla PTL at the conclusion of
Newton (assuming the leadership pipeline I've built for Kolla wants to run
for Kolla PTL), and would be pleased to lead a cross project effort in
Occata on moving from single-vendor to multi-vendor and beyond if there is
enough PTL interest. I take mentorship seriously and the various single
vendor (and others) PTL's won't be disappointed in such an effort.
>Making grand statements about "work harder on community" without any
>guidance about what we need to work on do not help the community.
Agree - lets fix that. Unfortunately it can't be fixed in an email thread
- it requires a cross-project team based approach with atleast 6 months of
If PTLs can weigh in on this thread and commit to participation in such a
cross-project subgroup, I'd be happy to lead it.
>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
More information about the OpenStack-dev