Open Stack

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Zane Bitter wrote:

> It could be that we don't actually want to get those features done, but 
> interestingly (and slightly surprisingly) during the technical vision 
> exercise nobody suggested we delete every design goal except for "Basic 
> Physical Data Center Management". (If you *do* think we should do that, 
> please propose it as a patch so we can discuss it.) It seems like we all 
> actually kinda agree on where we want to get, but some of the critical paths 
> to getting there may be blocked by other priorities.

Moving forward on "all actually kinda agree" is pretty much all we
can do. I often fear that the lack of widespread engagement with
threads like this one and with reviews like the original vision one
or your (Zane's) clarifications [1] represent disinterest. Thus, who
is the "all"?

However, as you've pointed out, the nature of TC elections mean that
the TC is the only community-wide representative body. If people
don't speak up in the individual cases, then we don't really have
any choice but to assume they have spoken when they elected the
people they did.

Do that many people vote?

Thus my continuous pleas for input.

But it's okay. We've had some interesting discussion here, and
that's useful. I'm not sure I'm able to make any concrete
conclusions about what people want the role of the TC to be other
than the same people who have always wanted it to be a reactive
governance org still do, and the same people who have always wanted
it be an active leadership org still do.

I guess those in the latter camp simply need to get on with it.

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/631435/

-- 
Chris Dent                       ٩◔̯◔۶           https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent