Open Stack

Michał Jastrzębski wrote:
> I created CIVS poll with options we discussed. Every core member should
> get link to poll voting, if that's not the case, please let me know.

Just a quick sidenote to explain how the "big-tent" model of governance
plays in here...

In the previous project structure model, we had "programs". If you
wanted to do networking stuff, you had to join the Networking program
(neutron). If you worked on object storage, you had to join the Object
Storage program (swift). The main issue with this model is that it
prevented alternate approaches from emerging (as a program PTL could
just refuse its emergence to continue to "own" that space). It also
created weird situations where there would be multiple distinct groups
of people in a program, but a single PTL to elect to represent them all.
That created unnecessary political issues within programs and tension
around PTL election.

Part of the big-tent project structure reform was to abolish programs
and organize our work around "teams", rather than "themes". Project
teams should be strongly aligned with a single team of people that work
together. That allowed some amount of competition to emerge (we still
try to avoid "gratuitous duplication of effort"), but most importantly
made sure groups of people could "own" their work without having to
defer to an outside core team or PTL. So if you have a distinct team, it
should be its own separate project team with its own PTL. There is no
program or namespace anymore. As a bonus side-effect, it made sure teams
would not indefinitely grow, and we all know that it's difficult to grow
core teams (and trust) beyond a certain point.

This is why we have multiple packaging project teams, each specialized
in a given package orchestration mechanism, rather than have a single
"Packaging" program with a single PTL and Ansible / Puppet / Chef
fighting in elections to get their man at the helm. This is why the
Storlets team, while deeply related to Swift and in very good
collaboration terms with them, was set up as a separate project team.
Different people, different team.

The fact that you're having hard discussions in Kolla about "adding new
deliverables" produced by distinct groups of people indicates that you
may be using Kolla as an old-style "program" rather than as a single
team. Why not set them up as separate project teams ? What am I missing
here ?

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)