Open Stack

On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 03:30:56PM +0000, gordon chung wrote:
> <snip>
> 
> the TC has historically been a reactive council that lets others ask for 
> change and acts as the final approver. do you believe the TC should be a 
> proactive committee that initiates change and if yes, to what scope? 
> more generally, what are some specific issues you'd like the TC address 
> in the coming year?
> 

This is an interesting question.

Leadership in an open source project really is a unique and interesting
thing. In a lot of ways you have little control over what is proposed
and focused on other then to suggest things you think are important and
hope that others agree. On the other hand, you need to apply some
control over what is allowed in to make sure it is good and what is
right for the project.

I see the TC, like being a PTL, as needing to straddle this line of
being there to foster and encourage, while also needing to be the final
say and being the enforcer when things that are not seen as right for
OpenStack as a whole.

The "committee" part of the TC is key here I think. This is not a
dictatorship, and no one person should have absolute say over what is
and is not acceptable. We need a diverse group of people, with the best
interests of the project in mind, to be able to discuss issues and
disagreements.

To directly answer the question - both. The TC needs to be looking at
the landscape and getting the bigger picture to help influence where we
are going. But there is also no avoiding being somewhat reactive. There
will always be new things and ideas popping up that will require a
reactive stance. If someone wants to propose using the D language to
implement some new project, the reasons for that choice need to be
evaluated to tell why and determine if it makes sense as far as the
overall project goes.

One thing I would like to see in the coming year is moving beyond the
required reactive aspect and reaching out more to users and operators to
learn more about what they need. What issues are they running into? If
they stopped using OpenStack, why? I think it's important that we
recognize OpenStack-wide what's missing or what's a problem and start
working with the various project teams to get some of these gaps and
shortcomings addressed.

Sean (smcginnis)

> [1] 
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-September/104821.html
> 
> thanks,
> -- 
> gord
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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