Open Stack

Julia Kreger <juliaashleykreger at gmail.com> writes:

> During the Forum in Berlin, the Technical Committee along with interested
> community members took some time to look back at the vision that written in
> early 2017.
>
> We had three simple questions:
> * What went well?
> * What needs improvement?
> * What should the next steps be?
>
> To summarize, the group thought the vision helped guide some thoughts and
> decisions. Helped provide validation on what was thought to be important.
> We have seen adjacent communities fostered. We didn't solely focus on the
> vision which was viewed as a positive as things do change over time. It
> helped us contrast, and in the process of writing the vision we reached the
> use of the same words.
>
> Most importantly, we learned that we took on too much work.
>
> As with most retrospectives, the list of things that needed improvement was
> a bit longer. There was some perception that it fell off the map, and that
> not every item received work. Possibly that we even took the vision too
> literally and too detailed as opposed to use it as more a guiding document
> to help us evolve as time goes on. There was consensus that there was still
> room to improve and that we could have done a better at conveying context
> to express how, what, and why.
>
> For next steps, we feel that it is time to revise the vision, albeit in a
> shorter form. We also felt that there could be a vision for the TC itself,
> which led to the discussion of providing clarity to the role of the
> Technical Committee.
>
> As for action items and next steps that we reached consensus on:
>
> * To refine the technical vision document.
> * That it was time to compose a new vision for the community.
> * Consensus was reached that there should be a vision of the TC itself, and
> as part of this have a living document that describes the "Role of the TC".
> ** ttx, cdent, and TheJulia have volunteered to continue those discussions.
> ** mnaser would start a discussion with the community as to what the TC
> should and shouldn't do. For those reading this, please remember that the
> TC's role is defined in the foundation bylaws, so this would be more of a
> collection of perceptions.
> * TheJulia to propose a governance update to suggest that people proposing
> TC candidacy go ahead and preemptively seek to answer the question of what
> the candidate perceives as the role of the TC.

Do we need a resolution for this? Or just for someone to remember to ask
the question when the time comes?

>
> The etherpad that followed the discussion can be found at:
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/BER-tc-vision-retrospective
>
> -Julia

-- 
Doug