Open Stack

On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 10:47 PM Chris Dent <cdent+os at anticdent.org> wrote:

> * How do you account for the low number of candidates? Do you
>    consider this a problem? Why or why not?

I mostly concern about why previous TCs stop to consider join the election
again?
Multiple reasons indeed,  but none of them concerns me. We need
whoever qualified as a candidate to keep jump out and help.
Still, this is a problem IMO, because we keep running our election between
those we know how OpenStack community works here. And I sense more new
joiner didn't actually know what exactly is TC or UC. There just to much
history. more committee report outside of ML might help with that situation?

>
> * Compare and contrast the role of the TC now to 4 years ago. If you
>    weren't around 4 years ago, comment on the changes you've seen
>    over the time you have been around. In either case: What do you
>    think the TC role should be now?

I like some of the current tasks, including keep update our governance, but
I would also like TC's role including reach out (Which I believe some TCs
done a great job).
We must keep reaching out with other parts of the community so we can
actually make sure all flow is working.
Like how can we get users/ops to provide experience, how can we get people
from the global community to better understand what we needed now and how
they can help, or how can we help with teams, UCs, etc. to fill up the gape
between.
>
> * What, to you, is the single most important thing the OpenStack
>    community needs to do to ensure that packagers, deployers, and
>    hobbyist users of OpenStack are willing to consistently upstream
>    their fixes and have a positive experience when they do? What is
>    the TC's role in helping make that "important thing" happen?

To guide them, and simplify their way through.
 Organization guideline [1] is definitely a star, if we actually plan to
promote it.

As for simplifying the way, we have too many ways to achieve too many
things, but lack of plans to integrate or even lack documentation to show
them why we got so many things. The most famous words we using is `that's
because of some history`, but when we fail on provides a guideline or
future plan, history will keep going. Which is up to TC to guiding teams to
achieve that goal.

>
> * If you had a magic wand and could inspire and make a single
>    sweeping architectural or software change across the services,
>    what would it be? For now, ignore legacy or upgrade concerns.
>    What role should the TC have in inspiring and driving such
>    changes?

remove rabbitmq dependancy, centralize API implementation (import
oslo.api), integrate TCs with UCs into a single commitee(consider that as
community architectural:) ).

BTW,  after I'm done with it, I might also think about selling it. :)

>
> * What can the TC do to make sure that the community (in its many
>    dimensions) is informed of and engaged in the discussions and
>    decisions of the TC?

The best way is to post on the place people actually read, also on the
place people might be interested to learn more about us.
It requires collaboration all the way from TC to end users (like user
groups, openInfra events, or enterprises). I mean TC+UC kind of
collaboration.


>
> * How do you counter people who assert the TC is not relevant?
>    (Presumably you think it is, otherwise you would not have run. If
>    you don't, why did you run?)

That's why we need to keep document things down and keep making OpenStack
as success as it can be.
So people get to know better if it's relevant to them or not.
Try to figure out if we didn't provide enough information or action to let
people understand the scope of TC's responsibility.


>
> That's probably more than enough. Thanks for your attention.
>
> --
> Chris Dent                       ٩◔̯◔۶           https://anticdent.org/
> freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent

[1] https://docs.openstack.org/contributors/organizations.

--
May The Force of OpenStack Be With You,
Rico Lin
irc: ricolin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20190226/b4620f9b/attachment.html>