Open Stack

Ash wrote:
> [...]
> Here's another take on the situation. If there are people who genuinely
> wish to see a CI pipeline that can support something like Go, perhaps
> you can establish a prerequisite of working with the Infra team on
> establishing the new pipeline. In my opinion, this seems to be the major
> gate. So, if there's a clear path identified, resources provided, and
> the Infra team is ultimately benefitted, then I'm not sure why there
> should be another rejection. Just a thought. I know this proposal
> continues to come up and I'm a big fan of seeing other languages
> supported, especially Go. But I also understand that it can break
> things. Personally, I would even volunteer to work on such an Infra effort. 
> 
> BTW, it is quite possible that another group might feel the same
> constraints. It's perfectly reasonable. But if we can overcome such
> obstacles, would the TC still have a concern? 

The TC isn't just one person. In complex situations like this where you
have to weigh the trade-off between opening up more choices and our
community's ability to digest/survive the change, there will always be a
wide variety of opinions. I won't claim to be able to predict how the
current membership would vote.

That said, I think that if we can have more confidence that our
structure can handle it (from infra to release/stable/dep management)
and that the OpenStack community will share expertise and best practices
on Go and avoid reinventing the wheel in every project, I expect a
majority of TC members to take that leap of faith.

To me, the important part is that introducing Go should not be another
way for some of our community to be different, but another way for our
community to be one. It should do more to bind our community together
than to split it into more factions and silos.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)