Open Stack

gordon chung wrote:
> hi,
>
> as there are many candidates this TC election, i figured i'd ask a
> question to better understand the candidates from the usual sales pitch
> in self-nominations. hopefully, this will give some insights into the
> candidates for those who haven't voted yet. obviously, the following is
> completely optional. :)
>
> i initially asked this to John Dickinson[1] in his self-nomination. i'd
> like to open this up to everyone. the (re-worded) question is:
>
> 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?
>
> [1]
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-September/104821.html
>
> thanks,

What a neat question!

So to me there is a middle-ground here between a fully proactive 
committee and a reactive one. I believe it has gone a little to far to 
the reactive side and I would like to have it move more toward the 
proactive side (obviously not all the way to proactive, this isn't a 
dictatorship).

The scope I would like is for the TC to be a body that helps advocate 
the larger picture of where the community wants to be in 2-5 years and 
being proactively trying to help make that happen. That could involve 
reaching out to other communities and working with the technical 
leadership in those other communities (for example the CNCF @ 
http://cncf.io/ who is working with these folks?). It should also 
involve working with-in our own community to try to understand what the 
2-5 year vision really is (because honestly what is it?); and working 
through the writing of that down, the dissemination of it and working 
with folks that don't (or may not) agree with it.

In general I'd really like for folks on the TC to be leaders that can 
help proactively guide the rest of the community forward... I don't 
quite know the full scope of such guidance, but I feel it is a missing 
component the community hasn't ever quite figured out to well (but I 
still have hope!).

-Josh