[tc][election] campaign discussion: what we can improve in TC & how?

Ghanshyam Mann gmann at ghanshyammann.com
Mon Apr 6 19:35:20 UTC 2020

 ---- On Sun, 05 Apr 2020 15:07:21 -0500 Radosław Piliszek <radoslaw.piliszek at gmail.com> wrote ----
 > Hello Ghanshyam,
 > > What you think we should and must improve in TC ? This can be
 > > the involvement of TC in the process from the governance point of view
 > > or technical help for each project.
 > >
 > > - Do we have too much restriction on project sides and not giving them
 > > a free hand? If yes, what we can improve and how?
 > From my current point of view, OpenStack TC is very liberal.
 > I base my opinion on some discussions of yours I read on ML and IRC and
 > also the non-observability of TC influences in Kolla. :-)
 > I think the current level of control is just right for many projects.
 > But maybe not all. I guess this is a good question to ask all
 > OpenStackers rather than just us.
 > That said, I believe it is wise to consider this broad topic in the
 > context of the recent Ironic thread on this ML.
 > The not-so-well-defined goal of TC for the upcoming times would be to
 > redefine OpenStack as something more (or maybe even "else") than open
 > source platform for doing IaaS. OpenStack is, as the name gladly
 > suggests, a stack, a pile of open source software projects, mostly in
 > Python, sharing common quality standards (or at least trying to!) under
 > TC guidance. It should be considered laudable to be part of OpenStack
 > rather than seek a way to escape it. If it is not, then we might as
 > well disband this and go home (btw, #stayhome).
 > As for simpler matters, TC might assume and advertise its role as
 > coordinator of cross-project efforts. And I don't mean current
 > community goals. I am thinking: if someone sees that by using project X
 > and project Y one could potentially achieve great thing Z, TC should be
 > offering its guidance on how to best approach this, in coordination
 > with cores from the relevant projects, and not in a way that enforces
 > TC to always intervene. Note this idea aligns with possible upcoming
 > TC-UC merger.

True.  This is good point and mering TC-UC is one of the good steps on this. 
Evaluation of use case with all possible solution (as there might be more than one
way to solve the things in openstack) is something really need to make openstack
easy to understand and use. 

Do you think SIG can play big role here working more closely with TC?


 > > - Is there less interaction from TC with projects? I am sure few
 > > projects/members even do not know even what TC is for? What's your
 > > idea to solve this.
 > I think this is partly because OpenStack core projects are considered
 > very mature. Continuing on the thought of control, quality and prestige
 > associated with OpenStack, a good short-term goal would be to revisit
 > the OpenStack projects and possibly restructure/deprecate some that
 > need this - considering both integral usability as well as standalone.
 > I don't think TC transparency needs 'fixing'. This is actually good
 > thing (TM) - as long as projects deliver quality we expect, that is.
 > -yoctozepto

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list