Open Stack

On Fri 29 Aug 2014 03:03:34 PM PDT, James E. Blair wrote:
> It's the best way we have right now, until we have time to make it more
> self-service.  We received one third-party CI request in 2 years, then
> we received 88 more in 6 months.  Our current process is built around
> the old conditions.  I don't know if the request list will continue
> indefinitely, but the announce list will.  We definitely need a
> low-volume place to announce changes to third-party CI operators.

Let me make it more clear: I acknowledge your pain and I think that
you're doing a great job at scaling up the efforts. It's great that
there is a team in charge of helping 3rd party CI folks get onboard.
Indeed, there are a lot of administrative requests coming into the infra
list and that is distracting.

NOTE before reading forward: I'm basing my opinion on the URL that
pleia2 shared before; if there have been conversations with the majority
of the 3rd party CI folks where they expressed agreement on the decision
to create 2 new lists, then most of my concerns disappear.

The reason of my concern comes from the way the decision was taken, its
speed and the method. I've seen in other OpenStack programs the bad
effects of important decisions, affecting multiple people, taken too
rapidly and with little socialization around them.

My job is to keep all openstack contributors happy and if all programs
start introducing radical changes with little discussions, my job
becomes almost impossible.

Summing up: I don't question infra's legitimate decision, provoked by a
visible pain in the program. I'm not sure adding more lists is going to
help but I don't want to dive in the choice of the tools: it's the
method that I disagree with because it may confuse new contributors and
makes my job less effective. I wish decisions involving
new/inexperienced contributors be taken by all teams with longer/deeper
conversations.

/stef

-- 
Ask and answer questions on https://ask.openstack.org