On 9/5/2019 5:33 AM, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
---- On Thu, 05 Sep 2019 19:04:39 +0900 Chris Dent <cdent+os@anticdent.org> wrote ----
On Thu, 5 Sep 2019, Thierry Carrez wrote:
So maybe we still have the same expectations, but we are definitely reducing our velocity... Would you say we need to better align our expectations with our actual speed? Or that we should reduce our expectations further, to drive velocity further down?
We should slow down enough that the vendors and enterprises start to suffer. If they never notice, then it's clear we're trying too hard and can chill out.
+1 on this but instead of slow down and make vendors suffer we need the proper way to notify or make them understand about the future cutoff effect on OpenStack as software. I know we have been trying every possible way but I am sure there are much more managerial steps can be taken. I expect Board of Director to come forward on this as an accountable entity. TC should raise this as high priority issue to them (in meetings, joint leadership meeting etc). Agreed. I think that partially falls into the community's hands itself. I have spent years advocating for OpenStack in my company and have started having success. The problem is that it is a slow process. I am hoping that others are doing the same and we will start seeing a reverse in the trend. Otherwise, I think we need help from the foundation leadership to reach out and start re-engaging companies.
I am sure this has been brought up before, can we make OpenStack membership company to have a minimum set of developers to maintain upstream. With the current situation, I think it make sense to ask them to contribute manpower also along with membership fee. But again this is more of BoD and foundation area. I had this thought, but it is quite likely that then I would not be able to contribute anymore. :-( So, I fear that could be a slippery slope for many people.
I agree on ttx proposal to reduce the TC number to 9 or 7, I do not think this will make any difference or slow down on any of the TC activity. 9 or 7 members are enough in TC.
As long as we get PTL(even without an election) we are in a good position. This time only 7 leaderless projects (6 actually with Cyborg PTL missing to propose nomination in election repo and only on ML) are not so bad number. But yes this is a sign of taking action before it goes into more worst situation.
-gmann
-- Chris Dent ٩◔̯◔۶ https://anticdent.org/ freenode: cdent