[openstack-dev] [security] [salt] Removal of Security and OpenStackSalt project teams from the Big Tent
Steven Dake (stdake)
stdake at cisco.com
Fri Sep 23 03:04:23 UTC 2016
Dims,
This isn’t any of my particular business except it could affect emerging technology projects (which I find important to OpenStack’s future) negatively – so I thought I’d chime in.
A lack of activity in a specs repo doesn’t mean much to me. For example, as Kolla was an emerging project we didn’t use any specs process at all (or very rarely). There is a reason behind this. Now that Kolla is stable and reliable and we feel we are not an emerging project, we plan to make use of a specs repo starting in Ocata.
I have no particular concerns with the other commentary – but please don’t judge a project by activity or lack of activity in one repo of its deliverables. Judge it holistically (You are judging holistically. I believe a lack of one repo’s activity shouldn’t be part of that judgement).
Regards
-steve
On 9/21/16, 2:08 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" <davanum at gmail.com> wrote:
Jakub,
Please see below.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Jakub Pavlik <jakub.pavlik at tcpcloud.eu> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> it took us 2 years of hard working to get these official. OpenStack-Salt is
> now used by around 40 production deployments and it is focused very on
> operation and popularity is growing. You are removing the project week after
> one of top contributor announced that they will use that as part of
> solution. We made a mistakes, however I do not think that is reason to
> remove us. I do no think that quality of the project is measured like this.
> Our PTL got ill and did not do properly his job for last 3 weeks, but this
> can happen anybody.
>
> It is up to you. If you think that we are useless for community, then
> remove us and we will have to continue outside of this community. However
> growing successful use cases will not be under official openstack community,
> which makes my feeling bad.
Data points so far are:
1. No response during Barcelona planning for rooms
2. Lack of candidates for PTL election
3. No activity in the releases/ repository hence no entries in
https://releases.openstack.org/
4. Meetings are not so regular?
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_salt/2016/ (supposed
to be weekly)
5. Is the specs repo really active?
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/openstack-salt-specs/ is the
work being done elsewhere?
6. Is there an effort to add stuff to the CI jobs running on openstack
infrastructure? (can't seem to find much
http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=salt&i=nope&files=zuul%2Flayout.yaml&repos=project-config)
I'll stop here and switch to #openstack-salt channel to help work you
all through if there is a consensus/willingness from the
openstack-salt team that there's significant work to be done. If you
think you are better off not on the governance, that would be your
call as well.
Thanks,
Dims
> Thanks,
>
> Jakub
>
>
> On 21.9.2016 21:03, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>
>> Excerpts from Filip Pytloun's message of 2016-09-21 20:36:42 +0200:
>>>
>>> On 2016/09/21 13:23, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The idea of splitting the contributor list comes up pretty regularly
>>>> and we rehash the same suggestions each time. Given that what we
>>>> have now worked fine for 57 of the 59 offical teams (the Astara
>>>> team knew in advance it would not have a PTL running, and Piet had
>>>> some sort of technical issue submitting his candidacy for the UX
>>>> team), I'm not yet convinced that we need to make large-scale changes
>>>> to our community communication standard practices in support of the
>>>> 2 remaining teams.
>>>>
>>>> That's not to say that the system we have now is perfect, but we
>>>> can't realistically support multiple systems at the same time. We
>>>> need everyone to use the same system, otherwise we have (even more)
>>>> fragmented communication. So, we either need everyone to agree to
>>>> some new system and then have people step forward to implement it,
>>>> or we need to all agree to do our best to use the system we have
>>>> in place now.
>>>
>>> I think it may work as is (with proper mail filters), but as someone
>>> already
>>> mentioned in this thread it would be better to have someone more
>>> experienced
>>> in Openstack community projects as a core team member or PTL to catch all
>>> these things otherwise it may happen that inexperienced PTL/team just
>>> miss
>>> something like now.
>>
>> If the team needs help, please ask for it. We should be able to find
>> someone to do a little mentoring and provide some guidance.
>>
>>> Still I don't think it's such a big issue to just fire project from Big
>>> Tent -
>>> who will benefit from that? Again someone already mentioned what will it
>>> mean
>>> for such team (loss of potencial developers, etc.).
>>> Moreover for teams who are actively working on project as it seems that
>>> both
>>> OpenStackSalt and Security teams do.
>>
>> Signing up to be a part of the big tent is not free. Membership comes
>> with expectations and obligations. Failing to meet those may be an
>> indication that the team isn't ready, or that membership is not a good
>> fit.
>>
>>> And I thought that real work on a project is our primary goal.. this
>>> situation
>>> is like loosing job when I left dirty coffee cup at my workspace.
>>
>> I hope you consider team leadership and community participation to
>> be more important than your analogy implies.
>>
>> Doug
>>
>>>> Did your release liaison follow the instructions to make that happen?
>>>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/releases/tree/README.rst
>>>
>>> That seems to be the reason. There was new release planned with support
>>> for
>>> containerized deployment which would follow that guide (as first releases
>>> were
>>> done during/shortly after openstack-salt move to Big Tent).
>>> As mentioned above - more experienced PTL would be helpful here and we
>>> are
>>> currently talking with people who could fit that position.
>>>
>>>>>> I see no emails tagged with [salt] on the mailing list since March of
>>>>>> this year, aside from this thread. Are you using a different communication
>>>>>> channel for team coordination? You mention IRC, but how are new contributors
>>>>>> expected to find you?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, we are using openstack-salt channel and openstack meetings over
>>>>> IRC. This channel is mentioned eg. in readme here [1] and community
>>>>> meetings page [2] which are on weekly basis (logs [3]).
>>>>>
>>>>> We also had a couple of people comming to team IRC talking to us about
>>>>> project
>>>>> so I believe they can find the way to contact us even without our heavy
>>>>> activity at openstack-dev (which should be better as I admitted).
>>>>
>>>> That works great for folks in your timezones. It's less useful for
>>>> anyone who isn't around at the same time as you, which is one reason
>>>> our community emphasizes using email communications. Email gives
>>>> you asynchronous discussions for timezone coverage, allows folks
>>>> who are traveling or off work for a period to catch up on and
>>>> participate in discussions later, etc.
>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://github.com/openstack/openstack-salt
>>>>> [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/openstack-salt
>>>>> [3] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_salt/2016/
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course I don't want to excuse our fault. In case it's not too
>>>>>>> late,
>>>>>>> we will try to be more active in mailing lists like openstack-dev and
>>>>>>> not miss such important events next time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] http://stackalytics.com/?module=openstacksalt-group
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Filip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Thierry Carrez
>>>>>>> <thierry at openstack.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As announced previously[1][2], there were no PTL candidates within
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> election deadline for a number of official OpenStack project teams:
>>>>>>>> Astara, UX, OpenStackSalt and Security.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the Astara case, the current team working on it would like to
>>>>>>>> abandon
>>>>>>>> the project (and let it be available for any new team who wishes to
>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>> it away). A change should be proposed really soon now to go in that
>>>>>>>> direction.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the UX case, the current PTL (Piet Kruithof) very quickly
>>>>>>>> reacted,
>>>>>>>> explained his error and asked to be considered for the position for
>>>>>>>> Ocata. The TC will officialize his nomination at the next meeting,
>>>>>>>> together with the newly elected PTLs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That leaves us with OpenStackSalt and Security, where nobody reacted
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> the announcement that we are missing PTL candidates. That points to
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> real disconnect between those teams and the rest of the community.
>>>>>>>> Even
>>>>>>>> if you didn't have the election schedule in mind, it was pretty hard
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> miss all the PTL nominations in the email last week.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The majority of TC members present at the meeting yesterday
>>>>>>>> suggested
>>>>>>>> that those project teams should be removed from the Big Tent, with
>>>>>>>> their
>>>>>>>> design summit space allocation slightly reduced to match that (and
>>>>>>>> make
>>>>>>>> room for other not-yet-official teams).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the case of OpenStackSalt, it's a relatively new addition, and if
>>>>>>>> they get their act together they could probably be re-proposed in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> future. In the case of Security, it points to a more significant
>>>>>>>> disconnect (since it's not the first time the PTL misses the
>>>>>>>> nomination
>>>>>>>> call). We definitely still need to care about Security (and we also
>>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>>> a home for the Vulnerability Management team), but I think the
>>>>>>>> "Security
>>>>>>>> team" acts more like a workgroup than as an official project team,
>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>>>> evidenced by the fact that nobody in that team reacted to the lack
>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> PTL nomination, or the announcement that the team missed the bus.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The suggested way forward there would be to remove the "Security
>>>>>>>> project
>>>>>>>> team", have the Vulnerability Management Team file to be its own
>>>>>>>> official project team (in the same vein as the stable maintenance
>>>>>>>> team),
>>>>>>>> and have Security be just a workgroup rather than a project team.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thoughts, comments ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [1]
>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-
>>>>>>>> September/103904.html
>>>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-
>>>>>>>> September/103939.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe:
>>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
> --
> Jakub Pavlik
> CTO
>
> [tcp ◕ cloud]
>
> +420 602 177 027
> jakub.pavlik at tcpcloud.eu
>
> tcp cloud a.s.
> Thamova 16
> 186 00 Praha 8 - Karlin
> Czech republic
> http://tcpcloud.eu
> http://opentcpcloud.org
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
--
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list