[openstack-dev] [nova][core] Expectations of core reviewers

Maru Newby marun at redhat.com
Mon Aug 18 17:00:57 UTC 2014

On Aug 13, 2014, at 10:32 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Joe Gordon <joe.gordon0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 8:31 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Just wanted to quickly weigh in with my thoughts on this important
>>>> topic. I
>>>> very much valued the face-to-face interaction that came from the
>>>> mid-cycle
>>>> meetup in Beaverton (it was the only one I've ever been to).
>>>> That said, I do not believe it should be a requirement that cores make
>>>> it to
>>>> the face-to-face meetings in-person. A number of folks have brought up
>>>> very
>>>> valid concerns about personal/family time, travel costs and burnout.
>>> I'm not proposing they be a requirement. I am proposing that they be
>>> strongly encouraged.
>>>> I believe that the issue raised about furthering the divide between core
>>>> and
>>>> non-core folks is actually the biggest reason I don't support a mandate
>>>> to
>>>> have cores at the face-to-face meetings, and I think we should make our
>>>> best
>>>> efforts to support quality virtual meetings that can be done on a more
>>>> frequent basis than the face-to-face meetings that would be optional.
>>> I am all for online meetings, but we don't have a practical way to do
>>> them at the moment apart from IRC. Until someone has a concrete
>>> proposal that's been shown to work, I feel its a straw man argument.
>> What about making it easier for remote people to participate at the
>> mid-cycle meetups? Set up some microphones and a Google hangout?  At least
>> that way attending the mid-cycle is not all or nothing.
>> We did something like this last cycle (IIRC we didn't have enough mics) and
>> it worked pretty well.
> As I said, I'm open to experimenting, but I need someone other than me
> to own that. I'm simply too busy to get to it.
> However, I don't think we should throw away the thing that works for
> best for us now, until we have a working replacement. I'm very much in
> favour of work being done on a replacement though.


I agree that that mid-cycles may not be sustainable over the long-term due to issues of travel cost (financial and otherwise) and a lack of inclusiveness, but I don't think they should stop happening until a suitably productive alternative has been found.


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list