Open Stack

I agree with Ed here.

If we have a stipulated time period set for proposals then grace period
sounds like a real-life deal. However, I would also encourage the idea
of opening this up early and keep the folder ready and officials review
the merge prop 2 months prior to the final date. It's better to have a
final date with longer open period than a small firm set date.

my 2 pennies worth.

On 9/18/15 1:15 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
> On Sep 18, 2015, at 7:27 AM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>> I'm strongly against this extra rules. OpenStack Officials Elections are
>>> ran by volunteers and any rules that adds complexity should be avoided.
>> +1
>>
>> Also, the schedule is announced 6 months in advance. The candidacy
>> period is announced when it starts and a reminder is sent a couple of
>> days before it ends.
> +1 to sticking to deadlines. A grace period just mean a different deadline.
>
> I don't, however, see the need for a firm start date. Comparing this to the feature freeze development cycle, in Nova we started opening up the specs for the N+1 cycle early in cycle N so that people can propose a spec early instead of waiting months and potentially missing the next window. So how about letting candidates declare early in the cycle by adding their names to the election repo at any time during the cycle up to the firm deadline? This might also encourage candidates not to wait until the last minute.
>
> -- Ed Leafe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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

-- 

Thanks,
Nikhil

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150918/ca1dbaa0/attachment.html>