Open Stack

In general I would prefer TC take an active role regarding exploring new
use cases and technology directions leverage the existing OpenStack
infrastructure. I would against TC being too active on project level
governance.

For example we have been discussing about edge computing recently and we
don't have any idea on how a lightweight OpenStack should look like: maybe
no scheduling since edge is more about provisioning ? maybe a Rust
implementation of this lightweight version of OpenStack ? There are so many
interesting new things that yet to be explored and should be championed by
the TC.

However regarding issues like how a project should govern itself, it is
better for TC to reactive and let project team driven its own structure. I
can't think of there is any concrete example on this matter now since TC
has been doing rather well on this matter , but I guess this could be a
precautious action :)

On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 9:35 PM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com>
wrote:

> Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2018-04-23 09:27:09 -0400:
> > [This is meant to be one of (I hope) several conversation-provoking
> > questions directed at prospective TC members to help the community
> > understand their positions before considering how to vote in the
> > ongoing election.]
> >
> > We frequently have discussions about whether the TC is active enough,
> > in terms of driving new policies, technology choices, and other
> > issues that affect the entire community.
> >
> > Please describe one case where we were either active or reactive
> > and how that was shown to be the right choice over time.
> >
> > Please describe another case where the choice to be active or
> > reactive ended up being the wrong choice.
> >
> > If you think the TC should tend to be more active in driving change
> > than it is today, please describe the changes (policy, culture,
> > etc.) you think would need to be made to do that effectively (not
> > which policies you want us to be more active on, but *how* to
> > organize the TC to be more active and have that work within the
> > community culture).
> >
> > If you think the TC should tend to be less active in driving change
> > overall, please describe what policies you think the TC should be
> > taking an active role in implementing.
> >
> > Doug
>
> There was a question from ttx on IRC [1] about my use of the terms
> "active" and "reactive" here. I mean active as "going out there and
> doing things and anticipating issues" and reactive as "dealing with
> things as they come up and aren't resolved in another way".
>
> Doug
>
> [1]
> http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%
> 23openstack-tc.2018-04-23.log.html
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Zhipeng (Howard) Huang

Standard Engineer
IT Standard & Patent/IT Product Line
Huawei Technologies Co,. Ltd
Email: huangzhipeng at huawei.com
Office: Huawei Industrial Base, Longgang, Shenzhen

(Previous)
Research Assistant
Mobile Ad-Hoc Network Lab, Calit2
University of California, Irvine
Email: zhipengh at uci.edu
Office: Calit2 Building Room 2402

OpenStack, OPNFV, OpenDaylight, OpenCompute Aficionado
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20180423/a5289952/attachment.html>