Open Stack

> > Additional cross-project resources can be ponied up by the large
> > contributor companies, and existing cross-project resources are not
> > necessarily divertable on command.
> 
> Sure additional cross-project resources can and need to be ponied up, but I
> am doubtful that will be enough.

OK, so what exactly do you suspect wouldn't be enough, for what
exactly?

Is it the likely number of such new resources, or the level of domain-
expertise that they can be realistically be expected bring to the
table, or the period of time to on-board them, or something else?

And which cross-project concern do you think is most strained by the
current set of projects in the integrated release? Is it:
 
 * QA
 * infra
 * release management
 * oslo
 * documentation
 * stable-maint
  
or something else?

Each of those teams has quite different prerequisite skill-sets, and
the on-ramp for someone jumping in seeking to make a positive impact
will vary from team to team.

Different approaches have been tried on different teams, ranging from
dedicated project-liaisons (Oslo) to shared cores (Sahara/Infra) to
newly assigned dedicated resources (QA/Infra). Which of these models
might work in your opinion? Which are doomed to failure, and why?

So can you be more specific here on why you think adding more cross-
project resources won't be enough to address an identified shortage
of cross-project resources, while de-integrating projects would be?

And, please, can we put the proverbial strawman back in its box on
this thread? It's all well and good as a polemic device, but doesn't
really move the discussion forward in a constructive way, IMO.

Thanks,
Eoghan