[openstack-dev] Large Contributing OpenStack Operators working group?

Hayes, Graham graham.hayes at hpe.com
Thu Feb 2 21:21:25 UTC 2017

On 02/02/2017 20:17, Jay Pipes wrote:
> Hi,
> I was told about this group today. I have a few questions. Hopefully
> someone from this team can illuminate me with some answers.
> 1) What is the purpose of this group? The wiki states that the team
> "aims to define the use cases and identify and prioritise the
> requirements which are needed to deploy, manage, and run services on top
> of OpenStack. This work includes identifying functional gaps, creating
> blueprints, submitting and reviewing patches to the relevant OpenStack
> projects, contributing to working those items, tracking their completion."
> What is the difference between the LCOO and the following existing
> working groups?
>   * Large Deployment Team
>   * Massively Distributed Team
>   * Product Working Group
>   * Telco/NFV Working Group
> 2) According to the wiki page, only companies that are "Multi-Cloud
> Operator[s] and/or Network Service Provider[s]" are welcome in this
> team. Why is the team called "Large Contributing OpenStack Operators" if
> it's only for Telcos? Further, if this is truly only for Telcos, why
> isn't the Telco/NFV working group appropriate?
> 3) Under the "Guiding principles" section of the above wiki, the top
> principle is "Align with the OpenStack Foundation". If this is the case,
> why did the group move its content to the closed Atlassian Confuence
> platform? Why does the group have a set of separate Slack channels
> instead of using the OpenStack mailing lists and IRC channels? Why is
> the OPNFV Jira used for tracking work items for the LCOO agenda?
> See https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Gluon/Tasks-Ocata for examples.
> 4) I see a lot of agenda items around projects like Gluon, Craton,
> Watcher, and Blazar. I don't see any concrete ideas about talking with
> the developers of the key infrastructure services that OpenStack is
> built around. How does the LCOO plan on reaching out to the developers
> of the long-standing OpenStack projects like Nova, Neutron, Cinder, and
> Keystone to drive their shared agenda?
> Thanks for reading and (hopefully) answering.
> -jay
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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

The entire wiki page [0] for this group is .... worrying.

For example:

 > If a member should fail to continue to meet these minimum criteria 
after joining, their membership may be revoked through an action of the 

and no, that is not the OpenStack board.

 From the etherpad [1] -

 > Reminder that our etherpad documents should document what was 
discussed and our decisions but should not contain organizational 
sensitive information or similar in process items.

It does seem to be not fully "open" by our 4 opens. It says it is under
the user committee - but I do not see it listed on their page [2]

0 - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/LCOO
1 - 
2 - https://governance.openstack.org/uc/#working-groups

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list