Open Stack

Chris Dent wrote:
> 
> This is another set of questions for TC candidates, to look at a
> different side of things from my first one [1] and somewhat related
> to the one Doug has asked [2].
> 
> As Doug mentions, a continuing role of the TC is to evaluate
> applicants to be official projects. These questions are about that.
> 
> There are 63 teams in the official list of projects. How do you feel
> about this size? Too big, too small, just right? Why?

I would say it's slightly too big.

It is easy to add a project, it is more difficult to remove one. It is
not that much of a problem, because it's not a zero-sum game (removing
projects won't magically add resources to the remaining ones). However,
 sometimes we get people to step up to "save" a project -- they end up
working on it mostly by themselves, because "someone has to". In some
cases maybe the right call would have been to let that project disappear
and apply those resources to ensure long-term sustainability of a more
strategic project (think one that everyone else depends on).

> If you had to make a single declaration about growth in the number
> of projects would you prefer to see (and why, of course):
> 
> * More projects as required by demand.
> * Slower or no growth to focus on what we've got.
> * Trim the number of projects to "get back to our roots".
> * Something else.

I'd say a combination of the first 3 :)

We should be able to add new projects as required by demand -- capture
the energy where it appears. At the same time, I'd like us to think
about cutting dead branches rather than maintaining them forever just
because that is what we always did. At one point, if the very few users
of that service do not really step up to work on it, maybe we should
reconsider heroic maintenance by one-person teams.

> [...]
> Recognizing that there are many types of contributors, not just
> developers, this question is about developers: Throughout history
> different members of the community have sometimes identified as an
> "OpenStack developer", sometimes as a project developer (e.g., "Nova
> developer"). Should we encourage contributors to think of themselves
> as primarily OpenStack developers? If so, how do we do that? If not,
> why not?

I'm a strong believer in the "OpenStack developer" -- I think we are
stronger as a coordinated framework than as separately-developed
compatible pieces of technology. Conway's law plays against us as we are
organized in project teams. I see SIGs and Popup teams as ways to
encourage that "OpenStack" thinking.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)