Open Stack

Zane Bitter wrote:
> On 22/08/14 12:45, Dolph Mathews wrote:
>>> >I'm all for getting a final decision, but a 'final' decision that
>>> has been
>>> >imposed from outside rather than internalised by the participants is...
>>> >rarely final.
>>> >
>> The expectation of a PTL isn't to stomp around and make "final"
>> decisions,
>> it's to step in when necessary and help both sides find the best
>> solution.
>> To moderate.
> 
> Oh sure, but that's not just the PTL's job. That's everyone's job. Don't
> you think?
> 
> I did that before I was the PTL and will continue to do it after I'm no
> longer the PTL. And if anyone in the (especially) the core or wider Heat
> team sees an opportunity to step in and moderate a disagreement I
> certainly expect them to take it and not wait for me to step in.
> 
> I'm not calling for no leadership here - I'm calling for leadership from
> _everyone_, not just from one person who holds a particular role.

I guess the difference between you and me is that I don't see having a
PTL as preventing that moderation and leadership from everyone. I really
see it as a safety valve in case things ever go badly wrong. I prefer
that safety valve to be built into the project leadership, rather than
at the TC level.

Could you explain how having a PTL is preventing that "leadership from
everyone" ? Did it prevent it in Heat ? Did having the PTL safety valve
hurt you ?

I'm open to the alternative solution (which would be for programs which
are not interested in having a PTL to just not have one). But then if
things go badly wrong, you require the TC to step in with threats of
removal of OpenStack and/or to force an election/vote in the middle of
the crisis. I'm really failing to see how that would result, in those
hypothetical crisis scenarios, in a better outcome.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)