Open Stack

On 30/04/15 12:07 +0300, Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
>
>On 04/30/15 10:15, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>
>    Doug Hellmann wrote:
>
>            Anyway, I find it curious that the TC is elected by those within the
>            developer community but TC candidates talk about representing the operator
>            community who are not allowed to vote. Operators meaning Admins,
>            Architects, etc. It sounds like this is something most TC candidates want
>            which most would agree is a good thing. At least I think so. ; )
>
>        I'm going to nitpick on terminology a bit. The TC is elected by
>        *technical contributors*, not developers, as described in the charter:
>        http://governance.openstack.org/reference/charter.html#voters-for-tc-seats-atc
>
>    +1
>
>    I think there is a key misconception in this thread that the TC is
>    supposed to represent (or talk about representing) more than just the
>    technical contributors that produce OpenStack.
>
>    When the OpenStack Foundation was set up, three bodies of governance
>    were established:
>
>    - the Board of Directors (representing the community as a whole)
>    - the Technical Committee (representing technical contributors)
>    - the User Committee (representing users and ops of OpenStack)
>
>    The Technical Committee mandate is therefore not to represent the users
>    and Ops of OpenStack in that setup, it's the role of the User committee.
>    If we did include Ops, we would be clearly overstepping our mandate.
>
>Thierry, essentially I agree with you. I do think though that the disconnect
>between Dev & Ops is an unhealthy situation. Two separate bodies working in two
>different ways with two different agendas is actually very much against the
>current way that most development organizations are aspire towards.
>
>The TC charter [1] states.
>
>" The Technical Committee (“TC”) is tasked with providing the technical
>leadership for OpenStack as a whole (all official projects, as defined below).
>
>It enforces OpenStack ideals (Openness, Transparency, Commonality, Integration,
>Quality...), decides on issues affecting multiple projects, forms an ultimate
>appeals board for technical decisions, and generally has technical oversight
>over all of OpenStack."
>
>IMHO, the spirit of the original question that was raised was - how can "all of
>OpenStack" only be those who write the code, and not those that use and operate
>it on a day to day basis?

Are these thoughts based on the current state of OpenStack? or are
they influenced a bit by our past?

The reason I ask is because I believe we've come a long way on
integrating more with Ops and Users. New groups have been created, new
meetups have been run, a dedicated day has been assigned at the
summit, a dedicated mailing list - that most of us follow - has been
created, etc, etc, etc.

I've seen the number of threads to discuss Ops topics increase in
openstack-dev and the influence of Ops - even just points of views
inherited from the feedback we've got - on reviews has gotten better
as well.

While I don't consider we're there yet, I do think there have been
several improvements in this area, which is why I'm curious to know
the answer to my questions above.

If it's a matter of having more Ops voting for the TC, we do have a
process in place that we could likely improve. Other than that, I
believe Thierry and Doug have explained perfectly the issues related
to having these 2 groups merged from a *governance* perspective.

Flavio


>
>
>    Rather than asking that Ops should be able to elect the TC, you should
>    probably start discussing how to improve on the User committee election
>    process and visibility.
>
>It would be great to understand how exactly this was done, what their charter
>is and how much influence they have on technical decisions within the larger
>OpenStack as a whole  [2]
>
>
>
>[1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/charter.html
>[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee
>--
>Best Regards,
>Maish Saidel-Keesing

>__________________________________________________________________________
>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150430/da7f99e9/attachment.pgp>