Open Stack

On 28/09/16 20:59 +0100, Chris Dent wrote:
>On Wed, 28 Sep 2016, Jim Rollenhagen wrote:
>
>>>>+1 to release notes or something of that like. i was asked to give an
>>>>update on the TC internally and it seems the only information out there
>>>>is to read through backlog of meeting logs or track the items that do
>>>>get raised to ML. even then, it's hard to define what deliverables were
>>>>achieved in the cycle.
>>>>
>>>
>>>FWIW, the resolutions that passed are listed here:
>>>https://governance.openstack.org/
>>
>>And the git tree, with a changelog, is here:
>>http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/
>
>I assume, but I'd prefer if he confirm, that the point gordc was
>trying to make was that there's more to what the TC gets up to than
>merging changes to governance. That's certainly a major aspect and
>one can track those changes by tracking both of those resources.
>
>Part of the point I was trying to make in the message to which gordc was
>responding is that whereas a git tree can allow someone to dig through
>and acquire details, a thing that is more like release notes[1] is far
>more human oriented and more likely to operate as a consumable digest of
>what has happened. Notably a git log will not reflect important
>conversations that did not result in a governance change nor activity
>that could have led to a governance change but was rejected. Certainly
>where a community says "no" is just as important as where it says "yes"?
>Further, merged changes are changes that have already been decided. We
>need more engagement, more broadly, while decisions are being
>considered. That means being more verbose, sooner.
>
>[1] Note that I don't actually think that release notes is the proper
>form for some extra communication from the TC. Rather the justifications
>that lead some projects to add release notes, in addition to the git
>log, are something to consider for TC activity.

One thing that's been baking in the back of my head is to produce some sort of
summary of what the TC has done during the cycle. One reason I've not brought
this up is that I believe the information provided through the communication
subteam is probably more useful than a final write up and the end of the cycle.
In addition to this, the TC positions are 1 year long.

I'm not saying it wouldn't be useful at all. What I'm saying is that the format,
and more importantly, the content will have to be studied. I'll likely start
working on this and I could use your help whether or not you'll win the election
:)

Flavio

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 847 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160929/3e1cc12e/attachment.pgp>