Open Stack

Blog version at: https://anticdent.org/tc-report-28.html

It's been a while since I've done one of these. I was between employers and
taking a break but am now back in the groove. There's been some activity in the
interim, which I'll try to summarize below, but first notes from this evening's
meeting.

I'm not fully up to speed yet, so this may be a bit sparse. It will pick up.

# Meeting

A meeting was
[declared](http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-July/119378.html)
to "discuss the next steps in establishing the vision" and "wrap up the goals".
[Meeting notes and
log](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2017/tc.2017-07-11-20.01.html).

## Goals

The first topic was moving forward on the two community goals for the Queens
cycle. There was no disagreement, especially as "champions" have stepped
forward to shepherd all of the projects on the goals. The chosen goals are:

* [policy and docs in code](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469954/)
* [tempest plugins separate repos](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/369749/)

## Vision Next Step

Again, mostly violent agreement on what to do: Accept the revised vision and
see how it goes. To ensure that the document is effectively responsive to any
necessary adjustments over time, it is being moved from reference to
resolution. There's a stack of four changes starting with the [original
draft](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453262/).

The vision itself has been slightly adjusted to be a bit more amenable to
skimming and make the overarching goals a bit more obvious.

## Other Meeting Stuff

### How's Office Hours Going?

Mixed. But worth continuing the experiment. The hope is that [office
hours](https://governance.openstack.org/tc/#office-hours) provide a reliable
but casual way to interact with members of the TC. Thus far they have mostly
been the TC talking amongst themselves, but several attendees at tonight's
meeting reported that though they don't speak much in office hours, they do
read. I'd personally like to see a lot more participation from anyone and
everyone.

Some people would like to change the schedule a bit, as one of the three slots
is a lot more popular than others and the least popular is very unpopular. The
reaction? "patches accepted".

That 01:00 UTC Wednesday slot is designed to allow some interaction with people
in the APAC region, with a long term goal of establishing future leaders in
OpenStack from that region.

What's clear is that when there are some people there, a conversation happens
containing relevant discussion. There's always something to talk about. For
example though there were two agenda items in this meeting, new topics kept
coming up.

### The Diversity Report

Bitergia produced a report on [gender diversity in
OpenStack](http://superuser.openstack.org/articles/bitergia-intel-report/),
though their data has some issues the general conclusion (we could do a _lot_
better) stands.

### Glare and Glance Compatibility

In [office hours earlier today](http://p.anticdent.org/JIh) there was some
discussion about Glare's application to be an official project. This came up
again in tonight's meeting and there is also a [long
thread](http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-July/119442.html)
on openstack-dev. There are concerns about overlap with Glance. If the overlap
is such that an exactly concurrent API could be provided, this is potentially a
very good thing. However, if the overlap is almost-but-not-quite then that
could present problems.  The mailing list thread has more information.

# Pending Stuff

## "big tent" and "hosted projects"

Two long email threads

* [Moving away from "big tent"
   terminology](http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-June/118368.html)
* [How to deal with confusion around "hosted
   projects"](http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-June/119043.html)

covered a lot of ground trying to work on the topic "better communicating what
is OpenStack". The "big tent" term is misunderstood and misused and the
difference between an "official" (subject to TC governance) project and one
that just happens to use OpenStack infra is also misunderstood, but sometimes
manipulated for gain.

While it was decided to straighforwardly [purge "big
tent"](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/480500/) in the governance repository
the discussion about hosted projects went very broad (the OpenStack adaptation
of Godwin's law is that any discussion will eventually generalize to "What is
OpenStack?") with some consideration of no longer allowing use of some
combination of

* the `openstack` prefix in git repositories
* openstack infrastructure in general

to just anyone who comes along. It's not clear how this was resolved, if at
all.  There was an impassioned [plea to fix the real
problem(s)](http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-June/119075.html)
instead of limiting open access for people who want to create more openness.

Does anyone recall where this topic landed, or if it hasn't yet landed, does
anyone have good ideas on how to get it to land?

-- 
Chris Dent                  ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)       https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent