Open Stack

Hi Nick,

On Mon, 2013-03-04 at 13:17 +0100, Nicolas Barcet wrote:
> As I do not think it is a good practice, nor completely practical to
> be both a PTL and a board member, I will not seek a third mandate as
> Ceilometer's project lead. 

Wow, I find that a really sad statement.

If you mean there's a conflict of interest between representing the Gold
Members on the Board and representing Ceilometers' contributors on the
Technical Committee, then I don't see it - we all wear multiple hats and
need to figure out a way to juggle them in an upfront and honest way.
The conflict of interest argument taken to an extreme would mean that
e.g. no affiliated developers should be allowed on the TC.

If you mean there's only so much anybody can achieve with their time and
that a PTL should dedicate all their available time to that task, then I
also don't see it - we all have multiple responsibilities and no PTL
dedicates all of their time to the role.

If you mean that, in your case, there's only time to dedicate to one of
the roles, then I can understand that - but what makes me sad is that
anyone would see the role of Board member as taking priority over the
role of PTL of an Integrated project. I take the opposite view - the
difference a PTL can make to OpenStack is far greater than the
difference a member of the 24 person Board can make.

I think you've done a great job of leading Ceilometer to date and
testament to that is the project has a bunch of strong technical leaders
(e.g. Doug, Eoghan, Julien and Angus) any of which would be awesome as
PTL. You guys have built a great team.

I would just hate this "Board members shouldn't be PTLs and vice-versa"
attitude to take hold in the project. I'd like to see the technical
leadership of the project take a far more active role in the Foundation,
not less.

Thanks,
Mark.