<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CA+qL3LVwYPw3gkbaTggxf4QWiorV75vtAoEgYYmXw-a3MRGntw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">
_______________________________________________<br>
Mailing list: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://launchpad.net/%7Eopenstack"
target="_blank">https://launchpad.net/~openstack</a><br>
Post to : <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:openstack@lists.launchpad.net">openstack@lists.launchpad.net</a><br>
Unsubscribe : <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://launchpad.net/%7Eopenstack"
target="_blank">https://launchpad.net/~openstack</a><br>
More help : <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp"
target="_blank">https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier
new',monospace">Just to point out a few things here, first
off there is no guideline that states a company affiliation
should have anything to do with the decision on voting
somebody as core. I have ABSOLUTELY NO concern about
representation of company affiliation what so ever. </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier
new',monospace"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier
new',monospace">Quite frankly I wouldn't mind if there were
20 core members from HP, if they're all actively engaged and
participating then that's great. I don't think there has
been ANY incidence of folks exerting inappropriate influence
based on their affiliated interest, and if there ever was I
think it would be easy to identify and address.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier
new',monospace"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier
new',monospace">As far as "don't need more" I don't agree
with that either, if there are folks contributing and doing
the work then there's no reason not to add them. Cinder IMO
does NOT have an excess of reviewers by a very very long
stretch.</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier
new',monospace"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:'courier
new',monospace">The criteria here should be review
consistency and quality as well as knowledge of the project,
nothing more nothing less. If there's an objection to the
individuals participation or contribution that's fine, but
company affiliation should have no bearing.</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
+1 to Ollie from me. <br>
<br>
+1 to John's points. If a company is colluding with other core
members, from the same company, to do bad things within a project,
it should become pretty obvious at some point and the project's
community should take action. If someone is putting in an extra
effort to provide quality code and reviews on a regular basis, then
why wouldn't we want that person on the team? Besides, being a core
member really just means that you are required to do reviews and
help out with the community. You do get some gerrit privileges for
reviews, but that's about it. I for one think that we absolutely
can use more core members to help out with reviews during the
milestone deadlines :)<br>
<br>
Walt<br>
</body>
</html>