<div dir="ltr"><div>Hola,</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for this question.<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 12:19 PM Chris Dent <<a href="mailto:cdent%2Bos@anticdent.org">cdent+os@anticdent.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
This is another set of questions for TC candidates, to look at a<br>
different side of things from my first one [1] and somewhat related<br>
to the one Doug has asked [2].<br>
<br>
As Doug mentions, a continuing role of the TC is to evaluate<br>
applicants to be official projects. These questions are about that.<br>
<br>
There are 63 teams in the official list of projects. How do you feel<br>
about this size? Too big, too small, just right? Why?<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>IMHO, the size is never a problem. The real question is rather about whether all of them are going to the same direction (and I'm trying hard to not make a parallel with geopolitics).</div><div>Oh, I'm not saying we don't have problems with 63 teams, right? At least, having this number of teams is a bit difficult because it's more difficult to know about all of them but just a small number (say 12)</div><div>It also means that it's somehow difficult to work on the same page of course.</div><div><br></div><div>So, what to do with those problems ? Maybe the TC should be more governing this list, by at least making sure that all projects run at the same page.</div><div>We have a maintenance tag. It's a very difficult tag to assign, right? Maybe it's time for us to be discussing about what it means for a project to be 'maintained'.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
If you had to make a single declaration about growth in the number<br>
of projects would you prefer to see (and why, of course):<br>
<br>
* More projects as required by demand.<br>
* Slower or no growth to focus on what we've got.<br>
* Trim the number of projects to "get back to our roots".<br>
* Something else.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My statement would be "focus on the existing projects, define a common set of attributes that would necessarly be more strict than today and see if and how all the current projects can fill the gaps for all of them". Somehow tied to the 2nd proposal you make, but not by principe, just pragmatism in order to help our users to have a decent experience.<br></div><div>That said, I'm not opposed to accepting new candidates if those are able to cope with all the necessary tasks. We had an incubation process early in OpenStack, that could be an idea for those new projects to get approved.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
How has the relatively recent emergence of the open infrastructure<br>
projects that are at the same "level" in the Foundation as OpenStack<br>
changed your thoughts on the above questions?<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div>Not really. I don't see this as a threat for OpenStack and I think it's good for the Foundation to evolve. But it will come with challenges, the first being the integration process with the approval checklist.</div><div class="gmail_quote">The only problem I see is that while granting a project is easy, calling the cut is very hard. The more we are clear on the requirements, the less we could be disappointed in the future.</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Do you think the number of projects has any impact (positive or<br>
negative) on our overall ability to get things done?<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'll restate here what I already said in another thread : I just don't think the TC role is about to drive architectural designs. Getting the shXt done is the matter of projects and individuals that are able to get some time for this.</div><div>What the TC is good at is to make those projects and contributors to communicate. We're far away from a BDFL model where a couple of people decide for all the community. If we really want to have things done, just make people discussing and act as a mediator.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Recognizing that there are many types of contributors, not just<br>
developers, this question is about developers: Throughout history<br>
different members of the community have sometimes identified as an<br>
"OpenStack developer", sometimes as a project developer (e.g., "Nova<br>
developer"). Should we encourage contributors to think of themselves<br>
as primarily OpenStack developers? If so, how do we do that? If not,<br>
why not?<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Good question. I don't think that people claiming to be "Project X developer" misconsider other projects, so it's not really a qualitative aspect.</div><div>It's more the fact that most of the day-to-day work is made within a single project, so most of the social traction is made there.</div></div><div class="gmail_quote">Also, I don't think forcing developers to consider themselves "OpenStack developers" will change anything. We should rather ask ourselves "How can we make the larger community of developers to share the same vision and pace ?".</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">-Sylvain</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Thanks.<br>
<br>
[1] <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-February/002914.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-February/002914.html</a><br>
[2] <a href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-February/002923.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-February/002923.html</a><br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ <a href="https://anticdent.org/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://anticdent.org/</a><br>
freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent</blockquote></div></div>