Open Stack

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 12/12/2013 08:24 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Hi fellow members of the TC,
> >
> > We now have a set of 10 potential names for the J release [1], and need
> > to pick the best method to select the winner. Historically we held a
> > Launchpad poll (~openstack group) over a refined set of 4-5 options. The
> > problem is, we don't really use the Launchpad ~openstack group anymore
> > (used to be the subscribers to the openstack ML) and the group was
> > therefore closed... so that's no longer the "less worse" option.
> >
> > A few proposed solutions:
> >
> > 1. "Public" CIVS vote, accessible to everyone with the link
> > Easy to set up, but vote is limited to one per IP address, which can
> > block legitimate voters while encouraging ballot stuffing.
> >
> > 2a. Private CIVS vote, link sent to openstack-dev subscribers
> > A bit painful to set up (need to extract the 2926 subscribers emails,
> > then feed them to CIVS by batches of less than 1000), but at least it's
> > not gameable. One difference is that receiving a private vote email will
> > result in more participation than the only-announced-on-ML Launchpad
> poll.
> >
> > 2b. Private CIVS vote, link sent to openstack list subscribers
> > More painful to set up (8573 members), and CIVS advises against being
> > used to run above "a couple thousands voters". That said it's probably
> > the closest to the people who voted in the past (general list).
> >
> > 3. Launchpad poll over ~openstack
> > The OpenStack group is still there, so technically we could still refine
> > the list to 4-5 candidates and set up a poll there. It's not as good as
> > Condorcet though, and would be more like "the people who used to vote in
> > previous names" than "the people who should vote now".
> >
> > 4a. Screw popular voting, let's do a TC members condorcet
> > Easy option. Might be seen as TC power landgrab, and it was funny to let
> > the "people" decide.
> >
> > 4b. Screw voting, let's pick Jekyll and be done with it
> > A variant of the previous option in case of consensus.
> >
> > I'm open to other suggestions :)
> >
> > [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReleaseNaming
>
> If we can make 2b work (openstack list), I would prefer that.  If we
> need to scale down the voting pool, 2a (openstack-dev list) seems to be
> the next best choice.
>
> Next I'd choose 4a.  The others just seem too broken.  I think a lot of
> people may be disappointed, though.  Then again, we don't hold votes on
> individual project names, so maybe it's not a big deal.
>
> Another variant on 4:
>
> 4c. TC members condorcet, but after a mailing list thread that lays out
> the options and asks everyone to speak up with their preferences to
> influence the vote.
>
> --
> Russell Bryant
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-TC mailing list
> OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
>
Naming is fun, but doesn't seem like it's worth exerting a TON of
effort/work IMO.  Maybe option 2a would be a compromise between being
fair/not game-able and not taking a ton of effort to set up?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/attachments/20131212/801056b5/attachment.html>