[tc] [all] Please help verify the role of the TC

Sean Mooney smooney at redhat.com
Tue Jan 15 17:04:02 UTC 2019

On Tue, 2019-01-15 at 16:52 +0000, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> Ah. Thanks for the clarification. You raise some interesting questions.
> Lets explore a bit. Like you, I have no idea what the right solution is. just thinking out loud.
> "What if the TC and PTLs were the same thing?"  One risk of making them the same is what
> I was talking about before. But what about one way association rather then both ways?
> something like "All PTL's have a seat on the TC and are required to attend meetings if
> possible"? That would allow the PTL's to have a voice in the TC, to know what's going on at
> the greater level and more easily feed back such info to the projects? It also would not
> block non ptl's from having a voice too if elected. It might be easier to make decisions that effect
> all the projects?
> Would something like that have the effect you were thinking?
> You mention that there might not be time for PTL's to do both things. Is there a scope of 
> what a PTL does somewhere we could look at? Maybe some of the scope could be moved to
> a different role to enable the TC stuff? A co-PTL or something?
minor comment on this point, PTL are already playing typically 3 roles that of the PTL and that of a core reviewer
and often that of an indivigual contributor. i do like the idea of PTLs haveing a voice on the TC but
it may be asking a lot for them to take on 4th role in paralle to the 3 they already have. so rather
then mandate that a PTL must attend if they can they could be given an optional seat with the ablity to deleaget
that to another core memember. simliar to project/release liasons each project could have a TC liason that
can default to the PTL or anoter core team memeber that they nominate to take there place?
> Thanks,
> Kevin
> ________________________________________
> From: Chris Dent [cdent+os at anticdent.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 3:01 AM
> To: openstack-discuss at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: RE: [tc] [all] Please help verify the role of the TC
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2019, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> > Been chewing on this thread for a while.... I think I should advocate the other direction.
> I'm not sure where to rejoin this thread, so picking here as it
> provides a reasonable entry point. First: thanks to everyone who has
> joined in, I honestly do feel that as annoying as these discussions
> can be, they often reveal something useful.
> Second, things went a bit sideways from the point I was trying to
> reach. I wasn't trying to say that PTLs are the obvious and
> experienced choice for TC leadership, nor that they were best placed
> to represent the community. I hope that my own behavior over the
> past few years has made it clear that I very definitely do not feel
> that way.
> However, as most respondents on this thread have pointed out, both
> TC members and PTLs are described as being over-tasked. What I'm
> trying to tease out or ask is: Are they over-tasked because they are
> working on too many things (or at least trying to sort through the
> too many things); a situation that results from _no unified
> technical leadership for the community_.
> My initial assertion was that the TC is insufficiently involved in
> defining and performing technical leadership.
> Then I implied that the TC cannot do anything like actionable and
> unified technical leadership because they have little to no real
> executive power and what power they do have (for example, trying to
> make openstack-wide goals) is in conflict (because of the limits of
> time and space) with the goals that PTLs (and others) are trying to
> enact.
> Thus: What if the TC and PTLs were the same thing? Would it become
> more obvious that there's too much in play to make progress in a
> unified direction (on the thing called OpenStack), leading us to
> choose less to do, and choose more consistency and actionable
> leadership? And would it enable some power to execute on that
> leadership.
> Those are questions, not assertions.
> > Getting some diversity of ideas from outside of those from PTL's
> > is probably a good idea for the overall health of OpenStack. What
> > about Users that have never been PTL's? Not developers?
> So, to summarize: While I agree we need a diversity of ideas, I
> don't think we lack for ideas, nor have we ever. What we lack
> is a small enough set of ideas to act on them with significant
> enough progress to make a real difference. How can we make the list
> small and (to bring this back to the TC role) empower the TC to
> execute on that list?
> And, to be complete, should we?
> And, to be extra really complete, I'm not sure if we should or not,
> which is why I'm asking.
> --
> Chris Dent                       ٩◔̯◔۶           https://anticdent.org/
> freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list