Open Stack

> On Feb 21, 2016, at 10:38 AM, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Armando,
> 
> I apologize if neutron does not have a limit of 2 core reviewers per company – I had heard this through the grapevine but a google search of the mailing list shows no such limitation.

It goes back to what Armando mentioned. If I don’t trust my fellow core reviewers, for *whatever reason*, we have much bigger problems than company affiliation.

I was told when I joined that the same company shouldn’t +2/+2/+A, which I follow, but even then, it’s a judgement call. I mean, who cares if the same company merges proposal bot? I certainly don’t. Nor would I think ill of it even for a second for a gate fix or the like.

It’s usually pretty obvious when one entity is trying to shove something in to the detriment of the project. And I’d rather just have a conversation with those folks at the time, and deal with the social problem, rather than trying to pass a million bureaucratic rules to cover every what-if. It’s not that I like having difficult conversations; I just like a world with a million little rules even less.

doug


> 
> Regards
> -steve
> 
> 
> From: "Armando M." <armamig at gmail.com <mailto:armamig at gmail.com>>
> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
> Date: Sunday, February 21, 2016 at 9:38 AM
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] discussion about core reviewer limitations by company
> 
> 
> 
> On 20 February 2016 at 12:58, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com <mailto:stdake at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Neutron, the largest project in OpenStack by active committers and reviewers as measured by the governance repository teamstats tool, has a limit of 2 core reviewers per company.  They do that for a reason.  I expect Kolla will grow over time (we are about 1/4 their size in terms of contributors and reviewers).  I believe other projects follow a similar pattern besides Neutron that already have good diversity (and intend to keep it in place).
> 
> Where did you find this information? I do not believe this is true. I agree wholeheartedly with Joshua: I personally value the judgement of the people I trust rather than looking at affiliation. 
>  
> 
> Regards
> -steve
> 
> 
> From: Gal Sagie <gal.sagie at gmail.com <mailto:gal.sagie at gmail.com>>
> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
> Date: Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 10:38 AM
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] discussion about core reviewer limitations by company
> 
> I think setting these limits is wrong, some companies have more overall representation then others.
> The core reviewer job should be on a personal basis and not on a company basis, i think the PTL of each project needs
> to make sure the diversity and the community voice is heard in each project and the correct path is taken even if
> many (or even if all) of the cores are from the same company.
> If you really want to set limits then i would go with something like 2 cores from the same company cannot +2 the same patch, but 
> again i am against such things personally..
> 
> Disclaimer: i am not personally involved in Kolla or know how things are running there.
> 
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 7:09 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com <mailto:stdake at cisco.com>> wrote:
> Hey folks,
> 
> Mirantis has been developing a big footprint in the core review team, and Red Hat already has a big footprint in the core review team.  These are all good things, but I want to avoid in the future a situation in which one company has a majority of core reviewers.  Since core reviewers set policy for the project, the project could be harmed if one company has such a majority.  This is one reason why project diversity is so important and has its own special snowflake tag in the governance repository.
> 
> I'd like your thoughts on how to best handle this situation, before I trigger  a vote we can all agree on.
> 
> I was thinking of something simple like:
> "1 company may not have more then 33% of core reviewers.  At the conclusion of PTL elections, the current cycle's 6 months of reviews completed will be used as a metric to select the core reviewers from that particular company if the core review team has shrunk as a result of removal of core reviewers during the cycle."
> 
> Thoughts, comments, questions, concerns, etc?
> 
> Regards,
> -steve
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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 <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Best Regards ,
> 
> The G.
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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 <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/20160221/53a6ff4c/attachment.html>