Open Stack

Excerpts from Joshua Harlow's message of 2015-09-14 08:41:37 -0700:
> Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Joshua Harlow wrote:
> >> I believe it is the TC job (in part) to help make the community better,
> >> and not via tags like this that IMHO actually make it worse;
> >
> > I think it's important to see the intent of the tag, rather than only
> > judge on its current proposed name. The big tent is vast, and there are
> > all kinds of projects, more or less mature, in it. The tag system is
> > there to help our ecosystem navigate the big tent by providing specific
> > bits of information about them.
> >
> > One such important bit of information is how risky it is to invest on a
> > given project, how likely is it to still be around tomorrow. Some
> > projects are so dependent on a single organization that they may,
> > literally, disappear in one day when a single person (the CEO of that
> > organization) decides so. I think our ecosystem should know about that,
> > without having to analyze stackalytics data. This is why I support
> > creating a tag describing project teams that are *extremely* fragile, at
> > the other end of the spectrum from projects that are "healthily diverse".
> >
> >> I really
> >> hope that folks on the TC can look back at their own projects they may
> >> have created and ask how would their own project have turned out if they
> >> were stamped with a similar tag...
> >
> > The thing is, one of the requirements to become an official OpenStack
> > project in the "integrated release" model was to reach a given level of
> > diversity in contributors. So "our" OpenStack projects just could not
> > officially exist if they would have been stamped with a similar tag.
> >
> > The big tent is more inclusive, as we no longer consider diversity
> > before we approve a project. The tag is the other side of the coin: we
> > still need to inform our ecosystem that some projects are less mature or
> > more fragile than others. The tag doesn't prevent the project to exist
> > in OpenStack, it just informs our users that there is a level of risk
> > associated with it.
> >
> > Or are you suggesting it is preferable to hide that risk from our
> > operators/users, to protect that project team developers ?
> 
> Not really. I get the idea of informing operators/users about how this 
> project may need more contributors. I just want it to be a positive 
> statement vs. a negative one if possible; and I'd really like for the TC 
> to also have some kind of proposal for helping those projects get to be 
> more diverse (vs just labeling them).
> 
> Some ideas already mentioned + new ones:
> 
> * Put the project on some kind of 'help wanted' page.
> * Help said projects sign-up for google summer of code (that may help 
> increase diversity?).

We're talking specifically about affiliation diversity. I'm not sure how
we would indicate student affiliation (independent? their university?
the company of their mentor?). I'm also not sure that a few short-term
helpers is necessarily going to improve any project's overall situation
in terms of affiliation diversity.

Doug

> * Something else?
> 
> >
>