Open Stack

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 05:27 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Zane Bitter <zbitter at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On 10/03/15 12:29, Russell Bryant wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> 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.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I appreciate the concerns here, but I'm also uncomfortable with having
> an
> > > open-ended hold on making projects an official part of OpenStack.
> There are
> > > a lot of projects on StackForge that are by any reasonable definition a
> > > part of this community, it seems wrong to put them on indefinite hold
> when
> > > the Big Tent model has already been agreed upon.
> > >
> > > Here is a possible compromise: invite applications now and set a fixed
> > > date on which the new system will become operational. That way it's the
> > > TC's responsibility to get the house in order by the deadline, rather
> than
> > > making it everyone else's problem. If we see a wildly inappropriate
> > > application then that's valuable data about where the requirements are
> > > unclear. To avoid mass confusion in the absence of a mature set of
> tags, I
> > > think it's probably appropriate that the changes kick in after the Kilo
> > > release, but let's make it as soon as possible after that.
> > >
> >
> > After watching the TC meeting, and double checking with the meeting notes
> > [0], it looks like the magnum vote was deferred to next week. But what
> > concerns me is the lack of action items assigned that will help make sure
> > next weeks discussion isn't just a repeat of what happened today.
> >
> > I get that starting to apply the big tent model to admit new projects
> > will
> > take time to get right, but deferring a decision for a "it's not you,
> > it's
> > me" reason without any actionable items doesn't sound like real progress
> > to
> > me.
>
> I came away with a very different impression. I thought we agreed that
> some of the folks who want more "tags" would start working on proposing
> them. We also have several proposals for projects that came in too late
> to be considered this week that we need to read and understand. We will
> then use all of that information together to decide if we are
> comfortable that we have the right sorts of guidelines in place, or if
> we need more (such as your proposal on diversity).
>
> So while there were no "person X go do Y" assignments, we do all have
> work that we're going to be doing over the next week to prepare to
> discuss the issue again.
>

Sure I did see some of that in the meeting, but the minutes have literally
no action items. And given our previous record for proposing and discussing
new tags, etc. without clear action items I am somewhat doubtful about next
week being different.


>
> Doug
>
> >
> >
> > [0]
> > http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2015/tc.2015-03-10-20.06.html
> >
> >
> > >
> > > cheers,
> > > Zane.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > > 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
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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/20150310/6c379017/attachment.html>