Open Stack

On Mon, 13 Mar 2017, Thierry Carrez wrote:

> At the recent Board+TC+UC meeting, the User Committee presented the API
> workgroup as a User Committee workgroup, based on data from:
>
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee

Yeah, that's been ongoing for a while and not something any of us in
the working group have done anything about as it didn't seem to
cause any harm and it came with one benefit: We consistently get
handling for a room at Summit.

Since we haven't had any indications one way or another that it is
bad to be sort of multi-homed, we haven't bothered to change things.

> That said, the API WG discussions seem to be mostly developer-driven,
> happen on openstack-dev, and the openstack/api-wg repository is listed
> under the TC-driven repositories:

It is certainly the case that we are mostly developers-of-openstack-
driven and we target those same developers as the audience for the
guidelines we create. However, it is also the case that the primary
reason we want to guide the developers is so they create APIs which
are consistent and usable by the end users.

So there's a bit of overlap.

> It's not really a big deal (I'm fine with it either way), but since we
> may want to list working groups on the governance website soon, it would
> be great to clarify where that one falls...

Given the desire to have working groups that are TC governed and for
them to be listed, I think it would make sense to clarify the API-WG
as being governed by the TC. That's how we think and operate [1], so may
as well make it official. If we do so we'd still like to keep ties
with the User Committee strong.

Unless, of course, there's some objection from the User Committee or
edleafe and elmiko.

[1] In the sense that if it there is an unresolvable dispute, the TC
is the source of mediation and resolution.

-- 
Chris Dent                 ¯\_(ツ)_/¯           https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent