Open Stack

On 2 March 2014 12:30, John Griffith <john.griffith at solidfire.com> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I just wanted to send out a quick note on a topic that came up recently.
> Unfortunately the folks that I'd like to read this most; don't participate
> on the ML typically, but I'd at least like to raise some community
> awareness.

Thank you. Perhaps you should do a talk at ATL about this - one aimed
at vendors:)

> We all know OpenStack is growing at a rapid pace and has a lot of promise,
> so much so that there's an enormous field of vendors and OS distributions
> that are focusing a lot of effort and marketing on the project.
>
> Something that came up recently in the Cinder project is that one of the
> backend device vendors wasn't happy with a feature that somebody was working
> on and contributed a patch for.  Instead of providing a meaningful review
> and suggesting alternatives to the patch they set up meetings with other
> vendors leaving the active members of the community out and picked things
> apart in their own format out of the public view.  Nobody from the core
> Cinder team was involved in these discussions or meetings (at least that
> I've been made aware of).

:( thats very sad. Did they comment on the review at all? Not that it
really matters, but I'm curious how the pathology exhibits itself.

> I don't want to go into detail about who, what, where etc at this point.  I
> instead, I want to point out that in my opinion this is no way to operate in
> an Open Source community.  Collaboration is one thing, but ambushing other
> peoples work is entirely unacceptable in my opinion.  OpenStack provides a
> plethora of ways to participate and voice your opinion, whether it be this
> mailing list, the IRC channels which are monitored daily and also host a
> published weekly meeting for most projects.  Of course when in doubt you're
> welcome to send me an email at any time with questions or concerns that you
> have about a patch.  In any case however the proper way to address concerns
> about a submitted patch is to provide a review for that patch.

+1000

> Everybody has a voice and the ability to participate, and the most effective
> way to do that is by thorough, timely and constructive code reviews.

+1000

-Rob


-- 
Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud