[openstack-dev] [security] [salt] Removal of Security and OpenStackSalt project teams from the Big Tent
Doug Hellmann
doug at doughellmann.com
Fri Sep 23 17:35:47 UTC 2016
Excerpts from Rob C's message of 2016-09-23 17:46:46 +0100:
> I wanted to provide a quick update from Security.
>
> We had our weekly IRC meeting yesterday, dhellman was kind enough to attend
> to help broker some of the discussion. In advance of the meeting I prepared
> a blog post where I tried to articulate my position and where I think
> things need to go next [1]. This was discussed at length during the IRC
> meeting [2]. We discussed the option of becoming a WG or staying in the big
> tent, this resulted in a vote, where the team all indicated their desire to
> stay within the big tent.
>
> My proposal for the future is outlined in some depth with [1] but the
> summary is that we've identified the areas that we need to improve on in
> order to be better members of the community, we want to stay within the
> big-tent and for me to maintain leadership through this transformational
> process with a view to having multiple candidates stand in the next
> election.
>
> Cheers
> -Rob
Thanks, Rob. Based on the discussions yesterday I think the team has a
better understanding of the communication issues and I'm convinced that
everyone is committed to improving. I support keeping the team in the
tent.
Doug
>
> [1]
> https://openstack-security.github.io/organization/2016/09/22/maturing-the-security-project.html
> [2]
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/security/2016/security.2016-09-22-17.00.log.html
>
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 4:23 AM, Davanum Srinivas <davanum at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Steven,
> >
> > Fair point.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dims
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:04 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) <stdake at cisco.com>
> > wrote:
> > > Dims,
> > >
> > > This isn’t any of my particular business except it could affect emerging
> > technology projects (which I find important to OpenStack’s future)
> > negatively – so I thought I’d chime in.
> > >
> > > A lack of activity in a specs repo doesn’t mean much to me. For
> > example, as Kolla was an emerging project we didn’t use any specs process
> > at all (or very rarely). There is a reason behind this. Now that Kolla is
> > stable and reliable and we feel we are not an emerging project, we plan to
> > make use of a specs repo starting in Ocata.
> > >
> > > I have no particular concerns with the other commentary – but please
> > don’t judge a project by activity or lack of activity in one repo of its
> > deliverables. Judge it holistically (You are judging holistically. I
> > believe a lack of one repo’s activity shouldn’t be part of that judgement).
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > -steve
> > >
> > >
> > > On 9/21/16, 2:08 PM, "Davanum Srinivas" <davanum at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Jakub,
> > >
> > > Please see below.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Jakub Pavlik <
> > jakub.pavlik at tcpcloud.eu> wrote:
> > > > Hello all,
> > > >
> > > > it took us 2 years of hard working to get these official.
> > OpenStack-Salt is
> > > > now used by around 40 production deployments and it is focused
> > very on
> > > > operation and popularity is growing. You are removing the project
> > week after
> > > > one of top contributor announced that they will use that as part of
> > > > solution. We made a mistakes, however I do not think that is
> > reason to
> > > > remove us. I do no think that quality of the project is measured
> > like this.
> > > > Our PTL got ill and did not do properly his job for last 3 weeks,
> > but this
> > > > can happen anybody.
> > > >
> > > > It is up to you. If you think that we are useless for community,
> > then
> > > > remove us and we will have to continue outside of this community.
> > However
> > > > growing successful use cases will not be under official openstack
> > community,
> > > > which makes my feeling bad.
> > >
> > > Data points so far are:
> > > 1. No response during Barcelona planning for rooms
> > > 2. Lack of candidates for PTL election
> > > 3. No activity in the releases/ repository hence no entries in
> > > https://releases.openstack.org/
> > > 4. Meetings are not so regular?
> > > http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_salt/2016/
> > (supposed
> > > to be weekly)
> > > 5. Is the specs repo really active?
> > > http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/openstack-salt-specs/ is the
> > > work being done elsewhere?
> > > 6. Is there an effort to add stuff to the CI jobs running on
> > openstack
> > > infrastructure? (can't seem to find much
> > > http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=salt&i=nope&files=zuul%
> > 2Flayout.yaml&repos=project-config)
> > >
> > > I'll stop here and switch to #openstack-salt channel to help work you
> > > all through if there is a consensus/willingness from the
> > > openstack-salt team that there's significant work to be done. If you
> > > think you are better off not on the governance, that would be your
> > > call as well.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Dims
> > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Jakub
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 21.9.2016 21:03, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Excerpts from Filip Pytloun's message of 2016-09-21 20:36:42
> > +0200:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 2016/09/21 13:23, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The idea of splitting the contributor list comes up pretty
> > regularly
> > > >>>> and we rehash the same suggestions each time. Given that what
> > we
> > > >>>> have now worked fine for 57 of the 59 offical teams (the Astara
> > > >>>> team knew in advance it would not have a PTL running, and Piet
> > had
> > > >>>> some sort of technical issue submitting his candidacy for the UX
> > > >>>> team), I'm not yet convinced that we need to make large-scale
> > changes
> > > >>>> to our community communication standard practices in support of
> > the
> > > >>>> 2 remaining teams.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> That's not to say that the system we have now is perfect, but we
> > > >>>> can't realistically support multiple systems at the same time.
> > We
> > > >>>> need everyone to use the same system, otherwise we have (even
> > more)
> > > >>>> fragmented communication. So, we either need everyone to agree
> > to
> > > >>>> some new system and then have people step forward to implement
> > it,
> > > >>>> or we need to all agree to do our best to use the system we have
> > > >>>> in place now.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I think it may work as is (with proper mail filters), but as
> > someone
> > > >>> already
> > > >>> mentioned in this thread it would be better to have someone more
> > > >>> experienced
> > > >>> in Openstack community projects as a core team member or PTL to
> > catch all
> > > >>> these things otherwise it may happen that inexperienced PTL/team
> > just
> > > >>> miss
> > > >>> something like now.
> > > >>
> > > >> If the team needs help, please ask for it. We should be able to
> > find
> > > >> someone to do a little mentoring and provide some guidance.
> > > >>
> > > >>> Still I don't think it's such a big issue to just fire project
> > from Big
> > > >>> Tent -
> > > >>> who will benefit from that? Again someone already mentioned what
> > will it
> > > >>> mean
> > > >>> for such team (loss of potencial developers, etc.).
> > > >>> Moreover for teams who are actively working on project as it
> > seems that
> > > >>> both
> > > >>> OpenStackSalt and Security teams do.
> > > >>
> > > >> Signing up to be a part of the big tent is not free. Membership
> > comes
> > > >> with expectations and obligations. Failing to meet those may be an
> > > >> indication that the team isn't ready, or that membership is not a
> > good
> > > >> fit.
> > > >>
> > > >>> And I thought that real work on a project is our primary goal..
> > this
> > > >>> situation
> > > >>> is like loosing job when I left dirty coffee cup at my workspace.
> > > >>
> > > >> I hope you consider team leadership and community participation to
> > > >> be more important than your analogy implies.
> > > >>
> > > >> Doug
> > > >>
> > > >>>> Did your release liaison follow the instructions to make that
> > happen?
> > > >>>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/releases/tree/
> > README.rst
> > > >>>
> > > >>> That seems to be the reason. There was new release planned with
> > support
> > > >>> for
> > > >>> containerized deployment which would follow that guide (as first
> > releases
> > > >>> were
> > > >>> done during/shortly after openstack-salt move to Big Tent).
> > > >>> As mentioned above - more experienced PTL would be helpful here
> > and we
> > > >>> are
> > > >>> currently talking with people who could fit that position.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>>>> I see no emails tagged with [salt] on the mailing list since
> > March of
> > > >>>>>> this year, aside from this thread. Are you using a different
> > communication
> > > >>>>>> channel for team coordination? You mention IRC, but how are
> > new contributors
> > > >>>>>> expected to find you?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Yes, we are using openstack-salt channel and openstack
> > meetings over
> > > >>>>> IRC. This channel is mentioned eg. in readme here [1] and
> > community
> > > >>>>> meetings page [2] which are on weekly basis (logs [3]).
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> We also had a couple of people comming to team IRC talking to
> > us about
> > > >>>>> project
> > > >>>>> so I believe they can find the way to contact us even without
> > our heavy
> > > >>>>> activity at openstack-dev (which should be better as I
> > admitted).
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> That works great for folks in your timezones. It's less useful
> > for
> > > >>>> anyone who isn't around at the same time as you, which is one
> > reason
> > > >>>> our community emphasizes using email communications. Email gives
> > > >>>> you asynchronous discussions for timezone coverage, allows folks
> > > >>>> who are traveling or off work for a period to catch up on and
> > > >>>> participate in discussions later, etc.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> [1] https://github.com/openstack/openstack-salt
> > > >>>>> [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/openstack-salt
> > > >>>>> [3] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_salt/
> > 2016/
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> Of course I don't want to excuse our fault. In case it's not
> > too
> > > >>>>>>> late,
> > > >>>>>>> we will try to be more active in mailing lists like
> > openstack-dev and
> > > >>>>>>> not miss such important events next time.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> [1] http://stackalytics.com/?module=openstacksalt-group
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> -Filip
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Thierry Carrez
> > > >>>>>>> <thierry at openstack.org>
> > > >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> As announced previously[1][2], there were no PTL candidates
> > within
> > > >>>>>>>> the
> > > >>>>>>>> election deadline for a number of official OpenStack
> > project teams:
> > > >>>>>>>> Astara, UX, OpenStackSalt and Security.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> In the Astara case, the current team working on it would
> > like to
> > > >>>>>>>> abandon
> > > >>>>>>>> the project (and let it be available for any new team who
> > wishes to
> > > >>>>>>>> take
> > > >>>>>>>> it away). A change should be proposed really soon now to go
> > in that
> > > >>>>>>>> direction.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> In the UX case, the current PTL (Piet Kruithof) very quickly
> > > >>>>>>>> reacted,
> > > >>>>>>>> explained his error and asked to be considered for the
> > position for
> > > >>>>>>>> Ocata. The TC will officialize his nomination at the next
> > meeting,
> > > >>>>>>>> together with the newly elected PTLs.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> That leaves us with OpenStackSalt and Security, where
> > nobody reacted
> > > >>>>>>>> to
> > > >>>>>>>> the announcement that we are missing PTL candidates. That
> > points to
> > > >>>>>>>> a
> > > >>>>>>>> real disconnect between those teams and the rest of the
> > community.
> > > >>>>>>>> Even
> > > >>>>>>>> if you didn't have the election schedule in mind, it was
> > pretty hard
> > > >>>>>>>> to
> > > >>>>>>>> miss all the PTL nominations in the email last week.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> The majority of TC members present at the meeting yesterday
> > > >>>>>>>> suggested
> > > >>>>>>>> that those project teams should be removed from the Big
> > Tent, with
> > > >>>>>>>> their
> > > >>>>>>>> design summit space allocation slightly reduced to match
> > that (and
> > > >>>>>>>> make
> > > >>>>>>>> room for other not-yet-official teams).
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> In the case of OpenStackSalt, it's a relatively new
> > addition, and if
> > > >>>>>>>> they get their act together they could probably be
> > re-proposed in
> > > >>>>>>>> the
> > > >>>>>>>> future. In the case of Security, it points to a more
> > significant
> > > >>>>>>>> disconnect (since it's not the first time the PTL misses the
> > > >>>>>>>> nomination
> > > >>>>>>>> call). We definitely still need to care about Security (and
> > we also
> > > >>>>>>>> need
> > > >>>>>>>> a home for the Vulnerability Management team), but I think
> > the
> > > >>>>>>>> "Security
> > > >>>>>>>> team" acts more like a workgroup than as an official
> > project team,
> > > >>>>>>>> as
> > > >>>>>>>> evidenced by the fact that nobody in that team reacted to
> > the lack
> > > >>>>>>>> of
> > > >>>>>>>> PTL nomination, or the announcement that the team missed
> > the bus.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> The suggested way forward there would be to remove the
> > "Security
> > > >>>>>>>> project
> > > >>>>>>>> team", have the Vulnerability Management Team file to be
> > its own
> > > >>>>>>>> official project team (in the same vein as the stable
> > maintenance
> > > >>>>>>>> team),
> > > >>>>>>>> and have Security be just a workgroup rather than a project
> > team.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> Thoughts, comments ?
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> [1]
> > > >>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-
> > > >>>>>>>> September/103904.html
> > > >>>>>>>> [2]
> > > >>>>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-
> > > >>>>>>>> September/103939.html
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>>>> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> ______________________________
> > ____________________________________________
> > > >>>>>>>> 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
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
> > ______________
> > > >>>>>>> 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
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
> > ______________
> > > >>>>>> 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
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> ____________________________________________________________
> > ______________
> > > >>>> 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
> > > >>
> > > >> ____________________________________________________________
> > ______________
> > > >> 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Jakub Pavlik
> > > > CTO
> > > >
> > > > [tcp ◕ cloud]
> > > >
> > > > +420 602 177 027
> > > > jakub.pavlik at tcpcloud.eu
> > > >
> > > > tcp cloud a.s.
> > > > Thamova 16
> > > > 186 00 Praha 8 - Karlin
> > > > Czech republic
> > > > http://tcpcloud.eu
> > > > http://opentcpcloud.org
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ____________________________________________________________
> > ______________
> > > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > ______________
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > ______________
> > > 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
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims
> >
> > __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list