Open Stack

Please consider my candidacy for membership on the technical committee.

My name is Anita Kuno. I consider my home project to be Infra but I tend
to move around wherever I feel the need is greatest.

I have worked on OpenStack since mid-grizzly starting as an intern with
the GNOME Outreach Program for Women (which is now known as Outreachy)
with my mentor Iccha Sethi. I moved around until I found Infra and have
considered that my home base ever since, mostly because Infra, and my
job, allows me so much flexibility.

During the Hong Kong summit I launched myself into Neutron to see if
there was anything I could do to support improvement, not because I knew
anything about Neutron but because I live by the axiom don't ask anyone
to do anything you wouldn't be prepared to do yourself. I realized that
Neutron developers couldn't even find each other to talk to each other
due to the crowd and organized a Neutron Tempest code sprint in Montreal
in January 2014.

Coming out of that, I have been involved with the third party ci space
ever since, a difficult and demanding space and those involved with have
many opinions on whether I have done and am doing a good job or a poor job.

I split the project-config repo out of what was the Infra config repo
(and is now system-config) at the end of Juno and have been a core
reviewer on the project ever since. I was able to help Neutron split out
their 'as a service' repos at the Sprint in Lehi in December last year
due to having repo-split experience myself.

I had known that the Nova-net to Neutron migration work was/is important
and had attended the Paris summit session on the issue, which had some
people indicate they would drive the work so stepped back believing it
was taken care of. Until December when I saw that not enough work had
taken place for anything to happen in Kilo. I got involved to support
Oleg Bondarev's work and help find more people to provide design
direction and feedback. We had a design and got some code written (way
to go group) however the feedback from the ops summit was such that it
became evident that the current solution even if finished would be
insufficient to address the issue. I curtailed our work (with agreement
of those at the meeting) in favour of opening a larger discussion on the
mailing list. I consider the work those involved put in to be valuable,
as it is possible we might not have gotten the level of detail in the
feedback we currently have without the code, thank you to all who
participated.

At present I have agreed to chair the discussion in Vancouver for the
session addressing Nova-net and Neutron. I ask that those involved and
affected by this work find it in their hearts to bring a positive
outlook to this issue. I'm grateful for your support.

Last cycle I attended the Neutron, Keystone, Nova and Cinder mid-cycles,
to help with third party work, the nova-net to neutron migration as well
as helping project devs better understand how infra works and how to
maximize efficient use of infra tools such as gerrit as well as how to
offer an elastic-recheck fingerprint.

I tend to gravitate towards work that needs to get done but which noone
else wants to do. I have been operating from the belief that this is for
the benefit of OpenStack. I will admit the big tent movement has thrown
me off in regards to what is beneficial for OpenStack. Thierry's blog
post helps in that regard. I would like to look and work on issues that
affect the health of OpenStack long term including our vision of our
targeted user.

I am an astrologer at heart and as such look at large patterns and
cycles of activity as well at their results. OpenStack is in a unique
position to redefine software creation as a process that has outcomes
that can be negotiated as beneficial for all concerned. The way it does
so is by incorporating unlimited freedom with careful evaluation of
structure and limits of resources by balancing culture and social
responsibility to seeing and respecting both ends of the spectrum in
actions. When we do this (and we have been able to) then everyone wins
and feels nourished as a result. When one side of OpenStack (the freedom
side, for instance) needs to accomplish its goal at the expense of the
other side (careful evaluation of structure and limits of resources)
then we all lose. It is a powerful energy structure and requires balance.

I also served the technical committee as election official for 4
election seasons. I want to thank you co-election officials for your
guidance and support in that process, Monty Taylor, Thierry Carrez and
Tristan Cacqueray (who is currently serving as an election official). I
would also like to acknowledge Elizabeth K. Joseph who has replaced me,
thank you to you as well, Elizabeth.

Please feel free to ask me any questions if my post has failed to
present my perspective and position. I will continue to serve OpenStack
to the best of my ability regardless of what position the community
chooses to bestow upon me.

Thank you for reading this post, please be sure to participate in the
election and cast your ballot,
Anita.