On 2020-09-16 16:51:10 +0300 (+0300), Marios Andreou wrote:
[...]
> I'd like to nominate myself for the PTL role - ideally working with a team
> of liaisons. Of course we may not find enough folks to fill all the roles
> documented in the spec, in which case the PTL will have to ensure this is
> done by some other means (in the worst case doing it themself); so let's
> see what the level of interest is here. Perhaps some folks will even
> disagree with the distributed PTL.
[...]
I think there may be some misunderstanding due to how that document
is laid out. It briefly describes our traditional "PTL with
Liaisons" project leadership model for purposes of comparison (and
to indicate that it's still the default), but then goes on to
describe a new "Distributed Leadership" model which has no PTL.
If you want to nominate yourself as PTL candidate for TripleO, you
would do that as usual next week when PTL nominations open (see
https://governance.openstack.org/election/ for instructions, but
we'll also send another announcement to the ML at the start of
nomination week). Whoever is elected TripleO PTL can delegate
whatever duties to as many liaisons as they like, this has always
been a strong recommendation anyway for a number of very good
reasons.
If the TripleO wants "PTL-less" distributed leadership instead (that
is, a group of liaisons reporting to the team and to the TC, with no
PTL as an intermediary), then that's what the 2020-08-03 Distributed
Project Leadership resolution is intended to allow.
thanks for clarifying - so I'm in fact describing PTL with liaisons above. I thought even with distributed PTL there is still a central figure that is to be held accountable should any of the liaisons be unable to fulfill their responsibilities.
I still think the distributed leadership model can work for TripleO but that will depend on how many folks step forward to signal interest here. I guess what we do ultimately will depend on that so let's give it a couple of days,
thanks, marios
--
Jeremy Stanley