[openstack-dev] [all] Switching to longer development cycles
Jay S Bryant
jungleboyj at gmail.com
Wed Dec 13 17:40:35 UTC 2017
On 12/13/2017 11:29 AM, Sean McGinnis wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 05:16:35PM +0000, Chris Jones wrote:
>> On 13 December 2017 at 17:12, Jimmy McArthur <jimmy at openstack.org> wrote:
>>> Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>>> - It doesn't mean that teams can only meet in-person once a year.
>>>> Summits would still provide a venue for team members to have an
>>>> in-person meeting. I also expect a revival of the team-organized
>>>> midcycles to replace the second PTG for teams that need or want to meet
>>>> more often.
>>> The PTG seems to allow greater coordination between groups. I worry that
>>> going back to an optional mid-cycle would reduce this cross-collaboration,
>>> while also reducing project face-to-face time.
>> I can't speak for the Foundation, but I would think it would be good to
>> have an official PTG in the middle of the cycle (perhaps neatly aligned
>> with some kind of milestone/event) that lets people discuss plans for
>> finishing off the release, and early work they want to get started on for
>> the subsequent release). The problem with team-organised midcycles (as I'm
>> sure everyone remembers), is that there's little/no opportunity for
>> cross-project work.
> This was one of my concerns initially too. We may have to see how things go and
> course correct once we have a little more data to go on. But the thought (or at
> least the hope) was that we could get by with using the one PTG early in the
> cycle to get alignment, then though IRC, the mailing list, and the Forums (keep
> in mind there will be two Forums within the cycle) we would be able to keep
> things going and discuss any cross project concerns.
> This may actually get more emphasis on developers attending the Forum. I think
> that is one part of our PTG/Design Summit split that has not fully settled the
> way we had hoped. The Forum is still encouraged for developers to attend. But I
> think the reality has been many companies now just see the Summit as a
> marketing event and see no reason to send any developers.
> I can say from the last couple Forum experiences, a lot of really good
> discussions have happened there. It's really been unfortunate that there were a
> lot of key people missing from some of those discussions though. Personally, my
> hope with making this change would mean that the likelihood of devs being able
> to justify going to the Forum increases.
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
I agree here. I think a lot of important things happen at the Summits
and it would be good if this helped encourage developers to get there
for Forum discussion. From a project perspective I think it then
becomes more important for topics to be collected and defined so that
developers have something concrete to point to as a need for travel. In
other words, we would need to somewhat change our thinking about the
Summits and better utilize the Forums.
More information about the OpenStack-dev