Open Stack

Le 17/09/2015 19:26, Kevin Benton a écrit :
>
> Maybe it would be a good idea to switch to 23:59 AOE deadlines like 
> many paper submissions use for academic conferences. That way there is 
> never a need to convert TZs, you just get it in by the end of the day 
> in your own time zone.
>


IMHO, the current process leaves enough time for proposing a candidacy, 
given that it's first advertised by beginning of the cycle on the main 
Release schedule wiki page (eg. for Liberty [1]) and then officially 
announced 8 days before the deadline. We also know that PTL elections 
come around 6 weeks before the Summit every cycle. One last official 
annoucement is made 1 day before the deadline.

Trying to target the very last moment for providing a candidacy just 
seems risky to me in that condition and we should really propose to the 
candidates to not wait for the last minute and propose far eariler.

-Sylvain


[1] 
https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=Liberty_Release_Schedule&oldid=78501

> On Sep 17, 2015 9:18 AM, "Edgar Magana" <edgar.magana at workday.com 
> <mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com>> wrote:
>
>     Folks,
>
>     Last year I found myself in the same position when I missed a
>     deadline because my wrong planning and time zones nightmare!
>     However, the rules were very clear and I assumed my mistake. So,
>     we should assume that we do not have candidates and follow the
>     already described process. However, this should be very easy to
>     figure out for the TC, it is just a matter to find our who is
>     interested in the PTL role and consulting with the core team of
>     that specific project.
>
>     Just my two cents…
>
>     Edgar
>
>     From: Kyle Mestery
>     Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>     questions)"
>     Date: Thursday, September 17, 2015 at 8:48 AM
>     To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
>     Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][elections] PTL nomination
>     period is now over
>
>     On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Monty Taylor
>     <mordred at inaugust.com <mailto:mordred at inaugust.com>> wrote:
>
>         On 09/17/2015 04:50 PM, Anita Kuno wrote:
>
>             On 09/17/2015 08:22 AM, Matt Riedemann wrote:
>
>
>
>                 On 9/17/2015 8:25 AM, Tristan Cacqueray wrote:
>
>                     PTL Nomination is now over. The official candidate
>                     list is available on
>                     the wiki[0].
>
>                     There are 5 projects without candidates, so
>                     according to this
>                     resolution[1], the TC we'll have to appoint a new
>                     PTL for Barbican,
>                     MagnetoDB, Magnum, Murano and Security
>
>
>                 This is devil's advocate, but why does a project
>                 technically need a PTL?
>                   Just so that there can be a contact point for
>                 cross-project things,
>                 i.e. a lightning rod?  There are projects that do a
>                 lot of group
>                 leadership/delegation/etc, so it doesn't seem that a
>                 PTL is technically
>                 required in all cases.
>
>
>             I think that is a great question for the TC to consider
>             when they
>             evaluate options for action with these projects.
>
>             The election officials are fulfilling their obligation
>             according to the
>             resolution:
>             http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/resolutions/20141128-elections-process-for-leaderless-programs.rst
>
>             If you read the verb there the verb is "can" not "must", I
>             choose the
>             verb "can" on purpose for the resolution when I wrote it.
>             The TC has the
>             option to select an appointee. The TC can do other things
>             as well,
>             should the TC choose.
>
>
>         I agree- and this is a great example of places where human
>         judgement is better than rules.
>
>         For instance - one of the projects had a nominee but it missed
>         the deadline, so that's probably an easy on.
>
>         For one of the projects it had been looking dead for a while,
>         so this is the final nail in the coffin from my POV
>
>         For the other three - I know they're still active projects
>         with people interested in them, so sorting them out will be fun!
>
>
>     This is the right approach. Human judgement #ftw! :)
>
>
>
>
>
>                     There are 7 projects that will have an election:
>                     Cinder, Glance, Ironic,
>                     Keystone, Mistral, Neutron and Oslo. The details
>                     for those will be
>                     posted tomorrow after Tony and I setup the CIVS
>                     system.
>
>                     Thank you,
>                     Tristan
>
>
>                     [0]:
>                     https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PTL_Elections_September_2015#Confirmed_Candidates
>
>                     [1]:
>                     http://governance.openstack.org/resolutions/20141128-elections-process-for-leaderless-programs.html
>
>
>
>
>
>                     __________________________________________________________________________
>
>                     OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
>                     questions)
>                     Unsubscribe:
>                     OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>                     <http://OpenStack-dev-request@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://OpenStack-dev-request@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://OpenStack-dev-request@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://OpenStack-dev-request@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/20150917/8bcdbbcb/attachment.html>