Open Stack

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 12:29 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> > The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
> > project governance.  You can find an overview from Thierry on the
> > OpenStack blog [1].
> >
> > Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being part of the
> > OpenStack community.  Another critical part was replacing the integrated
> > release with a set of tags.  A project would be given a tag if it meets
> > some defined set of criteria.
> >
> > I feel that we're at a very vulnerable part of this transition.  We've
> > abolished the incubation process and integrated release.  We've
> > established a fairly low bar for new projects [2].  However, we have not
> > yet approved *any* tags other than the one that reflects which projects
> > are included in the final integrated release (Kilo) [3].  Despite the
> > previously discussed challenges with the integrated release,
> > it did at least mean that a project has met a very useful set of
> > criteria [4].
> >
> > We now have several new project proposals.  However, I propose not
> > approving any new projects until we have a tagging system that is at
> > least far enough along to represent the set of criteria that we used to
> > apply to all OpenStack projects (with exception for ones we want to
> > consciously drop).  Otherwise, I think it's a significant setback to our
> > project governance as we have yet to provide any useful way to navigate
> > the growing set of projects.
> >
> > The resulting set of tags doesn't have to be focused on replicating our
> > previous set of criteria.  The focus must be on what information is
> > needed by various groups of consumers and tags are a mechanism to
> > implement that.  In any case, we're far from that point because today we
> > have nothing.
> >
> > I can't think of any good reason to rush into approving projects in the
> > short term.  If we're not able to work out this rich tagging system in a
> > reasonable amount of time, then maybe the whole approach is broken and
> > we need to rethink the whole approach.
>
> I think we made it pretty clear that we would be taking approvals
> slowly, and that we might not approve any new projects before the
> summit, precisely for the reasons you state here. I have found the
> submitted proposals
>
> Right, but we want it to be clear we're not approving new project
proposals at this point so everyone is on the same page.


> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > [1]
> > http://www.openstack.org/blog/2015/02/tc-update-project-reform-progress/
> > [2]
> > http://governance.openstack.org/reference/new-projects-requirements.html
> > [3] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/tags/index.html
> > [4]
> >
> http://governance.openstack.org/reference/incubation-integration-requirements.html
> >
> > --
> > Russell Bryant
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150310/0a19c6d9/attachment.html>