Open Stack

On 06/11/15 17:55 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>Sean Dague wrote:
>> On 11/06/2015 09:00 AM, Monty Taylor wrote:
>>> I do not think kiloeyes needs a mentor. It has 6 commits. It's not
>>> actually a thing. thinking about it is a waste of our time until such a
>>> future time when it is actually a thing (which is a time I hope does not
>>> come, btw, because they should just be collaborating with monasca)
>>
>> I think this has been my frustration with assuming TC mentoring of
>> not-yet-openstack projects is a thing we should sign up for. The goal
>> isn't to grow OpenStack to a 100 projects. The goal is that projects
>> that work like the rest of the OpenStack community get recognized as such.
>>
>> The TC energy seems much better spent on key cross project issues
>> affecting our existing ecosystem and users.
>
>I certainly see your point. My concern is that we keep a large number of
>applications around as open governance reviews, waiting for $SOMETHING
>to happen there before we should reconsider them. How should we judge
>when those are ready to be put back on the docket ?
>
>My suggestion was that rather than having nobody (or everyone) watching
>that, we should have someone different keeping track of each, to spread
>the load. I can certainly see how that can be a loss of our precious
>time, especially as more and more projects apply.

Ultimatedly, I think we need to have some sort of FAQ of "what to do
next" for common cases like lack of code, lack of openess, etc.
Sometimes we repeat ourselves when these cases show up.

That said, I think we need to have some sort of mentoring or
"800-CALL-THE-TC" line (#openstack-dev? m-l and irc) and make sure
people know they can reach out there.

I'll come up with a better proposal for this.

>I'm fine with the burden of "reproposing when ready" falling on the
>proposer. But then I think we should really reject the original proposal
>altogether, rather than keeping it around with vague comment, no real -2
>vote, and no real way for anyone to signal "hey now it *is* ready!".
>
>Would you all be fine with that instead ?

I'd be ok with this!

Flavio

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-tc/attachments/20151109/cc45005c/attachment.pgp>