Open Stack

On Tue, 2013-05-28 at 15:29 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:

> To kick off this second attempt, we had an interesting session at the
> Design Summit where various goals were discussed and various solutions
> proposed and compared. I summarized the current state of affairs on the
> wiki at:
> 
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TC_Membership_Models
> 
> I'd like everyone interested with this discussion to have a look at this
> page. If you see goals that we missed, please suggest them on the thread
> here, along with how well each currently-proposed solution would score
> against it. Same if you think some model was not scored fairly against
> existing stated goals. Finally, if you have an alternate model which
> you'd like to suggest, feel free to do so. I'll keep the wiki page
> updated based on the ML discussion.

Ok, here's two things I'd add:

- Collaborative - the more emphasis we place on voting structures and
representation, the more bureaucractic our governance become, the more
the focus drifts from collaborating based on trust and shared interests
towards a combative model based on mistrust and competing interests.

- Flexible - no governance is ever perfect and we must assume that our
governance model will need to evolve over time as the challenges we face
change. This is true not only for the top-level OpenStack project
governance, but also for the governance of individual projects, programs
and teams.

Granted, they're a bit harder to define than others ... but here's an
attempt at scoring the models:

"PTLs+5" (current model)

 * Collaborative: -1 (emphasis on representation)
 * Flexible: -1 (assumes PTL model)

"Best 7 PTLs + 6" model

 * Collaborative: -1 (emphasis on representation)
 * Flexible: -1 (assumes PTL model)

"All-directly-elected 11" model

 * Collaborative: +2 (focused on getting good people, not representation of interests)
 * Flexible: +2 (unlikely we'll need to change this much as OpenStack changes)

"Core PTLs + x" model

 * Collaborative: -1 (emphasises representation of core projects)
 * Flexible: -1 (assumes PTL model)

"Category" model

 * Collaborative: -1 (emphasis on representation)
 * Flexible: -1 (categories will have to be updated)

"no-PTL" model

 * Collaborative: +1 (we assume collaboration with project leads will happen naturally)
 * Flexible: +1 (assumes PTL model)

"6 categorized PTLs + 7 directly-elected" model

 * Collaborative: -2 (massive emphasis on ensuring representation)
 * Flexible: -2 (assumes PTL model, categories will have to be kept up to date)

Cheers,
Mark.