[openstack-dev] [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

Anita Kuno anteaya at anteaya.info
Mon Jun 9 19:21:20 UTC 2014

On 06/09/2014 03:17 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
>>>> So there are certain words that mean certain things, most don't, some do.
>>>> If words that mean certain things are used then some folks start using
>>>> the word and have expectations around the word and the OpenStack
>>>> Technical Committee and other OpenStack programs find themselves on the
>>>> hook for behaviours that they didn't agree to.
>>>> Currently the word under discussion is "certified" and its derivatives:
>>>> certification, certifying, and others with root word "certificate".
>>>> This came to my attention at the summit with a cinder summit session
>>>> with the one of the cerficiate words in the title. I had thought my
>>>> point had been made but it appears that there needs to be more
>>>> discussion on this. So let's discuss.
>>>> Let's start with the definition of certify:
>>>> cer·ti·fy
>>>> verb (used with object), cer·ti·fied, cer·ti·fy·ing.
>>>> 1. to attest as certain; give reliable information of; confirm: He
>>>> certified the truth of his claim.
>>>> 2. to testify to or vouch for in writing: The medical examiner will
>>>> certify his findings to the court.
>>>> 3. to guarantee; endorse reliably: to certify a document with an
>>>> official seal.
>>>> 4. to guarantee (a check) by writing on its face that the account
>>>> against which it is drawn has sufficient funds to pay it.
>>>> 5. to award a certificate to (a person) attesting to the completion of a
>>>> course of study or the passing of a qualifying examination.
>>>> Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/certify
>>>> The issue I have with the word certify is that it requires someone or a
>>>> group of someones to attest to something. The thing attested to is only
>>>> as credible as the someone or the group of someones doing the attesting.
>>>> We have no process, nor do I feel we want to have a process for
>>>> evaluating the reliability of the somones or groups of someones doing
>>>> the attesting.
>>>> I think that having testing in place in line with other programs testing
>>>> of patches (third party ci) in cinder should be sufficient to address
>>>> the underlying concern, namely reliability of opensource hooks to
>>>> proprietary code and/or hardware. I would like the use of the word
>>>> "certificate" and all its roots to no longer be used in OpenStack
>>>> programs with regard to testing. This won't happen until we get some
>>>> discussion and agreement on this, which I would like to have.
>>>> Thank you for your participation,
>>>> Anita.
>>> Hi Anita,
>>> Just a note on cross-posting to both the os-dev and os-tc lists.
>>> Anyone not on the TC who will hits reply-all is likely to see their
>>> post be rejected by the TC list moderator, but go through to the
>>> more open dev list.
>>> As a result, the thread diverges (as we saw with the recent election
>>> stats/turnout thread).
>>> Also, moderation rejects are an unpleasant user experience.
>>> So if a post is intended to reach out for input from the wider dev
>>> community, it's better to post *only* to the -dev list, or vice versa
>>> if you want to interact with a narrower audience.
>> My post was intended to include the tc list in the discussion
>> I have no say in what posts the tc email list moderator accepts or does
>> not, or how those posts not accepted are informed of their status.
> Well the TC list moderation policy isn't so much the issue here, as the
> practice of cross-posting between open- and closed-moderation lists.
> Even absent strict moderation being applied, as hasn't been the case for
> this thread, cross-posting still tends to cause divergence of threads due
> to moderator-lag and individuals choosing not to cross-post their replies.
> The os-dev subscriber list should be a strict super-set of the os-tc list,
> so anything posted just to the former will naturally be visible to the TC
> membership also.
> Thanks,
> Eoghan
I think you need to start a new topic with your thoughts on how the
email lists should be organized. This particular conversation doesn't
have much to do with the topic at hand anymore.

Thanks Eoghan,

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list