[openstack-dev] [TripleO] TripleO Core nominations

Steven Hardy shardy at redhat.com
Thu Sep 15 09:20:07 UTC 2016


Hi all,

As we work to finish the last remaining tasks for Newton, it's a good time
to look back over the cycle, and recognize the excellent work done by
several new contributors.

We've seen a different contributor pattern develop recently, where many
folks are subsystem experts and mostly focus on a particular project or
area of functionality.  I think this is a good thing, and it's hopefully
going to allow our community to scale more effectively over time (and it
fits pretty nicely with our new composable/modular architecture).

We do still need folks who can review with the entire TripleO architecture
in mind, but I'm very confident folks will start out as subsystem experts
and over time broaden their area of experience to encompass more of
the TripleO projects (we're already starting to see this IMO).

We've had some discussion in the past[1] about strictly defining subteams,
vs just adding folks to tripleo-core and expecting good judgement to be
used (e.g only approve/+2 stuff you're familiar with - and note that it's
totally fine for a core reviewer to continue to +1 things if the patch
looks OK but is outside their area of experience).

So, I'm in favor of continuing that pattern and just welcoming some of our
subsystem expert friends to tripleo-core, let me know if folks feel
strongly otherwise :)

The nominations, are based partly on the stats[2] and partly on my own
experience looking at reviews, patches and IRC discussion with these folks
- I've included details of the subsystems I expect these folks to focus
their +2A power on (at least initially):

1. Brent Eagles

Brent has been doing some excellent work mostly related to Neutron this
cycle - his reviews have been increasingly detailed, and show a solid
understanding of our composable services architecture.  He's also provided
a lot of valuable feedback on specs such as dpdk and sr-iov.  I propose
Brent continues this exellent Neutron focussed work, while also expanding
his review focus such as the good feedback he's been providing on new
Mistral actions in tripleo-common for custom-roles.

2. Pradeep Kilambi

Pradeep has done a large amount of pretty complex work around Ceilomenter
and Aodh over the last two cycles - he's dealt with some pretty tough
challenges around upgrades and has consistently provided good review
feedback and solid analysis via discussion on IRC.  I propose Prad
continues this excellent Ceilomenter/Aodh focussed work, while also
expanding review focus aiming to cover more of t-h-t and other repos over
time.

3. Carlos Camacho

Carlos has been mostly focussed on composability, and has done a great job
of working through the initial architecture implementation, including
writing some very detailed initial docs[3] to help folks make the transition
to the new architecture.  I'd suggest that Carlos looks to maintain this
focus on composable services, while also building depth of reviews in other
repos.

4. Ryan Brady

Ryan has been one of the main contributors implementing the new Mistral
based API in tripleo-common.  His reviews, patches and IRC discussion have
consistently demonstrated that he's an expert on the mistral
actions/workflows and I think it makes sense for him to help with review
velocity in this area, and also look to help with those subsystems
interacting with the API such as tripleoclient.

5. Dan Sneddon

For many cycles, Dan has been driving direction around our network
architecture, and he's been consistently doing a relatively small number of
very high-quality and insightful reviews on both os-net-config and the
network templates for tripleo-heat-templates.  I'd suggest Dan continues
this focus, and he's indicated he may have more bandwidth to help with
reviews around networking in future.

Please can I get feedback from exisitng core reviewers - you're free to +1
these nominations (or abstain), but any -1 will veto the process.  I'll
wait one week, and if we have consensus add the above folks to
tripleo-core.

Finally, there are quite a few folks doing great work that are not on this
list, but seem to be well on track towards core status.  Some of those
folks I've already reached out to, but if you're not nominated now, please
don't be disheartened, and feel free to chat to me on IRC about it.  Also
note the following:

 - We need folks to regularly show up, establishing a long-term pattern of
   doing useful reviews, but core status isn't about raw number of reviews,
   it's about consistent downvotes and detailed, well considered and
   insightful feedback that helps increase quality and catch issues early.

 - Try to spend some time reviewing stuff outside your normal area of
   expertise, to build understanding of the broader TripleO system - as
   discussed above subsystem experts are a good thing, but we also need
   to see some appreciation of the broader Tripleo archticture &
   interfaces (all the folks above have demonstrated solid knowledge of one
   or more of our primary interfaces, e.g the Heat or the Mistral layer)

Thanks to everyone for the hard work during Newton, I'm looking forward to
seeing what we can achieve during Ocata!

Steve

[1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-June/096968.html
[2] http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/tripleo-group/90
[3] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/tripleo-docs/developer/tht_walkthrough/tht_walkthrough.html



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list