Open Stack

Confirmed.

On 10/07/2013 10:58 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'd like to offer my self as a candidate for the Technical Committee
> election.
>
>
> About me
>
> I've been working on OpenStack for over two years now and have
> particularly focused my contributions on Nova and Oslo, but have also
> contributed in smaller ways to most other OpenStack projects.
>
> For the past year or more, I've been a member of the Technical Committee
> as Oslo PTL.
>
> I'm a proud Red Hatter and am also a member of the OpenStack Foundation
> Board of Directors.
>
>
> The Past Year
>
> I'm very happy with some of the progress and decisions the TC made over
> the past year.
>
> We welcomed Heat, Ceilometer, Trove, Savannah, Marconi into the
> OpenStack family either as integrated or incubating projects. The TC
> carefully considered each of these applications and my own rule of thumb
> was "does it have a healthy contributor community and is it a sensible
> growth of OpenStack's scope?". I love to see this sustainable growth in
> our project and community.
>
> In a similar vein, I'm really excited that TripleO has been added as an
> official OpenStack program. One of OpenStack's biggest criticisms has
> always been that it is difficult to deploy and manage. TripleO is an
> awesome idea but, more importantly, is a way for all of us to work
> together to build tools and processes for deploying and managing our
> software.
>
> In terms of more meta changes, I'm really happy that the TC has moved to
> a model where all seats are directly elected. This removed the concern
> that adding new projects would make the TC unmanageably large so that
> can no longer be used as an excuse to not add new projects. I also hope
> that this election model will result in more members who are interested
> in cross-project concerns.
>
> I'm proud of the work we did with the foundation board to adopt the term
> "integrated" as a way to separate the TC controlled "accepted into the
> OpenStack integrated release process" status from the board controlled
> "allowed to use associate OpenStack trademark" status. This is really
> important because it allows the TC to evaluate new project applications
> on a purely technical basis.
>
> I think it's really positive that we adopted the concept of "programs"
> as a recognition that not all important efforts and contributor groups
> are focused around a particular server project. Our community has a very
> diverse set of contributor groups and all of them play an important
> role.
>
> Finally, I'm happy to see us starting to use gerrit to track TC
> decisions in a way that is easily referenceable. Looking back over the
> last year of TC decisions would have been a lot easier with 'git log'!
> See https://review.openstack.org/50066 :)
>
>
> Next Year
>
> I want to see the TC continue to be welcoming to new projects and
> contributor groups. That said, I'd like us to continue improve how we
> deliberate over these applications. For example, maybe we assign
> specific TC members with aspects of the project to report back on - e.g.
> architecture, development process, contributor diversity, test coverage,
> etc.
>
> I'm also really eager to encourage any experiments with evolving our
> project governance model. I think we're seeing several projects with
> multiple leaders who are essentially peers and having to choose a PTL
> can be an artificial elevation of one person over their peers. I stepped
> down as Oslo PTL because I want Oslo to have a bunch of strong leaders,
> rather than be dominated by one person.
>
> Finally, I'd like the TC to be used more often as a forum for people to
> develop their ideas about the project. We should view the TC as a group
> of project leaders who are happy, as a group, to help people out with
> advice and mentorship.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev