[openstack-dev] [election][tc]Question for candidates about global reachout

Lance Bragstad lbragstad at gmail.com
Mon Sep 17 21:56:44 UTC 2018


On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 1:42 PM Mohammed Naser <mnaser at vexxhost.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On that note, is there any way to get an 'invite' onto those channels?
>
> Any information about the foundation side of things about the
> 'official' channels?
>

I actually have a question about this as well. During the TC discussion
last Friday there was representation from the Foundation in the room. I
though I remember someone (annabelleB?) saying there were known issues
(technical or otherwise) regarding the official channels spun up by the
Foundation.

Does anyone know what issues were being referred to here?


>
> Thanks,
> Mohammed
> On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 3:28 PM Samuel Cassiba <samuel at cassi.ba> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 6:58 AM Sylvain Bauza <sylvain.bauza at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Le lun. 17 sept. 2018 à 15:32, Jeremy Stanley <fungi at yuggoth.org> a
> écrit :
> > >>
> > >> On 2018-09-16 14:14:41 +0200 (+0200), Jean-philippe Evrard wrote:
> > >> [...]
> > >> > - What is the problem joining Wechat will solve (keeping in mind the
> > >> > language barrier)?
> > >>
> > >> As I understand it, the suggestion is that mere presence of project
> > >> leadership in venues where this emerging subset of our community
> > >> gathers would provide a strong signal that we support them and care
> > >> about their experience with the software.
> > >>
> > >> > - Isn't this problem already solved for other languages with
> > >> > existing initiatives like local ambassadors and i18n team? Why
> > >> > aren't these relevant?
> > >> [...]
> > >>
> > >> It seems like there are at least couple of factors at play here:
> > >> first the significant number of users and contributors within
> > >> mainland China compared to other regions (analysis suggests there
> > >> were nearly as many contributors to the Rocky release from China as
> > >> the USA), but second there may be facets of Chinese culture which
> > >> make this sort of demonstrative presence a much stronger signal than
> > >> it would be in other cultures.
> > >>
> > >> > - Pardon my ignorance here, what is the problem with email? (I
> > >> > understand some chat systems might be blocked, I thought emails
> > >> > would be fine, and the lowest common denominator).
> > >>
> > >> Someone in the TC room (forgive me, I don't recall who now, maybe
> > >> Rico?) asserted that Chinese contributors generally only read the
> > >> first message in any given thread (perhaps just looking for possible
> > >> announcements?) and that if they _do_ attempt to read through some
> > >> of the longer threads they don't participate in them because the
> > >> discussion is presumed to be over and decisions final by the time
> > >> they "reach the end" (I guess not realizing that it's perfectly fine
> > >> to reply to a month-old discussion and try to help alter course on
> > >> things if you have an actual concern?).
> > >>
> > >
> > > While I understand the technical issues that could be due using IRC in
> China, I still don't get why opening the gates and saying WeChat being yet
> another official channel would prevent our community from fragmenting.
> > >
> > > Truly the usage of IRC is certainly questionable, but if we have
> multiple ways to discuss, I just doubt we could prevent us to silo
> ourselves between our personal usages.
> > > Either we consider the new channels as being only for southbound
> communication, or we envisage the possibility, as a community, to migrate
> from IRC to elsewhere (I'm particulary not fan of the latter so I would
> challenge this but I can understand the reasons)
> > >
> > > -Sylvain
> > >
> >
> > Objectively, I don't see a way to endorse something other than IRC
> > without some form of collective presence on more than just Wechat to
> > keep the message intact. IRC is the official messaging platform, for
> > whatever that's worth these days. However, at present, it makes less
> > and less sense to explicitly eschew other outlets in favor. From a
> > Chef OpenStack perspective, the common medium is, perhaps not
> > unsurprising, code review. Everything else evolved over time to be
> > southbound paths to the code, including most of the conversation
> > taking place there as opposed to IRC.
> >
> > The continuation of this thread only confirms that there is already
> > fragmentation in the community, and that people on each side of the
> > void genuinely want to close that gap. At this point, the thing to do
> > is prevent further fragmentation of the intent. It is, however, far
> > easier to bikeshed over which platform of choice.
> >
> > At present, it seems a collective presence is forming ad hoc,
> > regardless of any such resolution. With some additional coordination
> > and planning, I think that there could be something that could scale
> > beyond one or two outlets.
> >
> > Best,
> > Samuel
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
>
> --
> Mohammed Naser — vexxhost
> -----------------------------------------------------
> D. 514-316-8872
> D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200
> E. mnaser at vexxhost.com
> W. http://vexxhost.com
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20180917/a2c00d92/attachment.html>


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list