Open Stack

> On Sep 5, 2019, at 6:04 AM, Chris Dent <cdent+os at anticdent.org> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 5 Sep 2019, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> 
>> So maybe we still have the same expectations, but we are definitely reducing our velocity... Would you say we need to better align our expectations with our actual speed? Or that we should reduce our expectations further, to drive velocity further down?
> 
> We should slow down enough that the vendors and enterprises start to
> suffer. If they never notice, then it's clear we're trying too hard
> and can chill out.

As much as I support the labor movement, I don’t think *starting*
from an adversarial “we’ll show them!” position with our employers 
and potential contributors is the most effective way to establish 
the sort of change we want. It would much more likely instill the 
idea that this community won’t work with new contributors, which 
isn’t going to be any healthier than the current situation over 
the long term.

That said, I do agree with the “chill out” approach. 

Do what you can and then emphasize collaboration over doing things 
for non-contributors, to turn them into contributors. Be honest about 
the need for help, and clear about what sort of help is needed, so that 
someone who *is* motivated can get involved. And make it easy for others 
to join and fulfill those needs, so the bureaucracy doesn’t demotivate 
them into looking for other communities to join instead.

Also, accept that either approach is going to mean things will not be
done, and that is OK. Look for ways to minimize the amount of effort
for tasks that must be done, but let “good ideas” go. If they’re
good enough, and you make it possible for others to contribute, someone
will step up. But if that doesn’t happen, it should not be a source
of stress for anyone. That means the “good idea” doesn’t meet the
bar of economic viability.

Doug