Open Stack

On 12/12/2013 09:29 AM, Russell Bryant 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.
I agree with this statement.
> 
> 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.
I also agree with the assessment that people may be disappointed. I
would be disappointed if any of the 4 options were selected.

I vote on anything I can vote on and would be disappointed if the number
of things I could vote on were reduced. Especially if the reduction was
due to organizational reasons.

Having said that, if I can help in any way with the coordination of
whatever voting mechanism is chosen, I will do so. You only need to let
me know, Thierry.

Thanks,
Anita.

> 
> 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.
>