[openstack-dev] [all][tc] establishing project-wide goals
clint at fewbar.com
Tue Aug 2 18:46:50 UTC 2016
Excerpts from Jay Pipes's message of 2016-08-01 10:23:57 -0400:
> On 08/01/2016 08:33 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> > On 07/29/2016 04:55 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >> One of the outcomes of the discussion at the leadership training
> >> session earlier this year was the idea that the TC should set some
> >> community-wide goals for accomplishing specific technical tasks to
> >> get the projects synced up and moving in the same direction.
> >> After several drafts via etherpad and input from other TC and SWG
> >> members, I've prepared the change for the governance repo  and
> >> am ready to open this discussion up to the broader community. Please
> >> read through the patch carefully, especially the "goals/index.rst"
> >> document which tries to lay out the expectations for what makes a
> >> good goal for this purpose and for how teams are meant to approach
> >> working on these goals.
> >> I've also prepared two patches proposing specific goals for Ocata
> >> . I've tried to keep these suggested goals for the first
> >> iteration limited to "finish what we've started" type items, so
> >> they are small and straightforward enough to be able to be completed.
> >> That will let us experiment with the process of managing goals this
> >> time around, and set us up for discussions that may need to happen
> >> at the Ocata summit about implementation.
> >> For future cycles, we can iterate on making the goals "harder", and
> >> collecting suggestions for goals from the community during the forum
> >> discussions that will happen at summits starting in Boston.
> >> Doug
> >>  https://review.openstack.org/349068 describe a process for managing community-wide goals
> >>  https://review.openstack.org/349069 add ocata goal "support python 3.5"
> >>  https://review.openstack.org/349070 add ocata goal "switch to oslo libraries"
> > I like the direction this is headed. And I think for the test items, it
> > works pretty well.
> I commented on the reviews, but I disagree with both the direction and
> the proposed implementation of this.
> In short, I think there's too much stick and not enough carrot. We
> should create natural incentives for projects to achieve desired
> alignment in certain areas, but placing mandates on project teams in a
> diverse community like OpenStack is not useful.
> The consequences of a project team *not* meeting these proposed mandates
> has yet to be decided (and I made that point on the governance patch
> review). But let's say that the consequences are that a project is
> removed from the OpenStack big tent if they fail to complete these
> "shared objectives".
> What will we do when Swift decides that they have no intention of using
> oslo.messaging or oslo.config because they can't stand fundamentals
> about those libraries? Are we going to kick Swift, a founding project of
> OpenStack, out of the OpenStack big tent?
Membership in the tent is the carrot, and ejection is the stick. The
big tent was an acknowledgement that giving out carrots makes everyone
stronger (all these well fed projects have led to a bigger supply of
carrots in general).
I think this proposal is an attempt to manage the ensuing chaos. We've
all seen carrot farmers abandon their farms, as well as duplicated effort
leading to a confusing experience for consumers of OpenStack's products.
I think there's room to build consensus around diversity in implementation
and even culture. We don't need to be a monolith. Our Swift development
community is bringing strong, powerful insight to the overall effort,
and strengthens the OpenStack brand considerably. Certainly we can
support projects doing things their own way in some instances if they
so choose. What we don't want, however, is projects that operate in
relative isolation, without any cohesion, even loose cohesion, with the
More information about the OpenStack-dev