[all][tc] Formalizing cross-project pop-up teams

Adam Spiers aspiers at suse.com
Fri Feb 8 09:18:29 UTC 2019


Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote: 
>Adam Spiers <aspiers at suse.com> writes: 
>>Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote: 
>>>Isn't the point of these teams that they would be coordinating work 
>>>within other existing projects? 
>>
>>Yes.
>>
>>>So I wouldn't expect them to need git repositories or new IRC 
>>>channels. 
>>
>>Never?  Code and documentation doesn't always naturally belong in a 
>>single project, especially when it relates to cross-project work. 
>>Similarly, if (say) Monasca, Vitrage, and Heat all need an IRC channel 
>>in which to collaborate on a specific topic, it seems fairly clear 
>>that none of #openstack-{monasca,vitrage,heat} are optimal choices. 
>
>What's wrong with #openstack-dev? 

Maybe nothing, or maybe it's too noisy - I dunno ;-)  Maybe the latter 
could be solved by setting up #openstack-breakout{1..10} for impromptu 
meetings where meetbot and channel logging are provided. 

>>The self-healing SIG has both a dedicated git repository (for docs, 
>>code, and in order to be able to use StoryBoard) and a dedicated IRC 
>>channel.  We find both useful. 
>>
>>Of course SIGs are more heavy-weight and long-lived so I'm not 
>>suggesting that all or even necessarily the majority of popup teams 
>>would need git/IRC.  But I imagine it's possible in some cases, at 
>>least.
>
>Right, SIGs are not designed to disappear after a task is done in the 
>way that popup teams are. If a popup team is going to create code, it 
>needs to end up in a repository that is owned and maintained by someone 
>over the long term. If that requires a new repo, and one of the existing 
>teams isn't a natural home, then I think a new regular team is likely a 
>better fit for the task than a popup team. 

True.  And for temporary docs / notes / brainstorming there's the wiki 
and etherpad.  So yeah, in terms of infrastructure maybe IRC meetings 
in one of the communal meeting channels is the only thing needed. 

We'd still need to take care of ensuring that popups are easily 
discoverable by anyone, however.  And this ties in with the "should we 
require official approval" debate - maybe a halfway house is the right 
balance between red tape and agility?  For example, set up a table on 
a page like 

    https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Popup_teams

and warmly encourage newly forming teams to register themselves by 
adding a row to that table.  Suggested columns: 

    - Team name
    - One-line summary of team purpose
    - Expected life span (optional)
    - Link to team wiki page or etherpad
    - Link to IRC meeting schedule (if any)
    - Other comments

Or if that's too much of a free-for-all, it could be a slightly more 
formal process of submitting a review to add a row to a page: 

    https://governance.openstack.org/popup-teams/

which would be similar in spirit to: 

    https://governance.openstack.org/sigs/

Either this or a wiki page would ensure that anyone can easily 
discover what teams are currently in existence, or have been in the 
past (since historical information is often useful too). 

Just thinking out aloud ... 



More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list