[openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

Doug Hellmann doug at doughellmann.com
Fri Oct 13 17:23:56 UTC 2017

Excerpts from Paul Belanger's message of 2017-10-12 23:13:11 -0400:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:42:46PM -0700, Clay Gerrard wrote:
> > I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
> > other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect me
> > and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the
> > social groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to consider
> > voting records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
> > 
> > To candidates:
> > 
> > Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> > https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where
> > they thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> > explain why you think so?
> > 
> > It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
> > 
> > -Clay
> 2017-05-30 Guidelines for Managing Releases of Binary Artifacts [1].
> It would have to be 469265[2] that Doug Hellmann proposed after the OpenStack
> Summit in Boston. There has been a lot of passionate people in the community
> that have been asking for containers, specifically docker in this case.
> Regardless of what side you are in the debate of container vs VM, together as a
> community we had discussions on what the guideline would look like.
> Individually, each project had a specific notion of what publishing containers
> would look like, but the TC help navigate some of the technical issues around
> binary vs source releasing, versioning and branding (to name a few).
> While there is still work to be done on getting the publishing pipeline
> finalized, I like to think the interested parties in binary artifacts are happy
> we now have governance in place.
> [1] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/resolutions/20170530-binary-artifacts.rst
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/469265/

Thanks for highlighting that one, Paul. I agree that was a particularly
good outcome. Everyone involved listened to each other, came to a
common understanding of both the technical and social issues involved,
and worked on the resulting wording together. And it all happened
relatively quickly, too, given how contentious it seemed like it
was going to be at the outset.


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list