Open Stack

Also worth noting 10 of the current TC members are AUCs, including the 
recent former TC Chair.

> Jimmy McArthur <mailto:jimmy at openstack.org>
> February 25, 2020 at 12:05 PM
>>
>> Thanks a lot, ttx for starting this thread.
>>
>> option 1 looks more feasible way but few question/feedback:
>> - How we will execute the "designate 5 members from TC and select UC chair"?
>>
>> If by volunteer call from TC?
>> I think this can lead to the current situation where very few members are interested to
>> serve as UC.  I am afraid that we will get 5 volunteers and a chair.
>>
>> If by force?
>> I do not think this is or should be an option :). But if then how we make sure the TC
>> members are ok/good to handle the UC tasks on the non-technical side for example
>> ambassador program.
> We have dedicated Foundation Staff that offer support for the 
> Ambassador Program as well as User Survey.  I don't have concerns 
> about this falling between the cracks during the transition and it's 
> something we can work with the new UC seats under the TC on.
>
> Cheers,
> Jimmy
>> - Will there be any change in TC elections, votes weightage and nomination? by this change
>> of a new subteam under TC?
>>
>> - I think along with the merging proposal, we should distribute the current tasks handled by UC
>> among TC, Ops group, foundation etc. For example, the ambassador program, local user group
>> interaction or any other managerial tasks should be excluded from TC scope.
>> If we would like to merge all then I think we should rename TC to Steering Committee or
>> something which is option 3.
>>
>> - What about merging UC into Ops team, they are more close to users/operators and active
>> in terms of the meetup and providing feedback etc.
>>
>> -gmann
>>
>>
>>> Begin forwarded message:
>>>
>>> *From: *Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org 
>>> <mailto:thierry at openstack.org>>
>>> *Subject: **Re: [all][tc][uc] Uniting the TC and the UC*
>>> *Date: *February 25, 2020 at 11:36:06 AM CST
>>> *To: *openstack-discuss at lists.openstack.org 
>>> <mailto:openstack-discuss at lists.openstack.org>
>>>
>>> Tim Bell wrote:
>>>> Are there some stats on the active electorate sizes ?
>>>> I have the impression that the voting AUCs were a smaller number of 
>>>> people than the contributors so a single election may result in 
>>>> less total representation compared to today’s UC & TC.
>>>
>>> I don't have the exact numbers around, but yes, there are many more 
>>> ATCs (voters in the current TC election) than AUCs (voters in the 
>>> current UC election).
>>>
>>> So it's a valid concern that people with more of an operator 
>>> background would have trouble getting elected if the electorate 
>>> contains more people with more of a developer background.
>>>
>>> But I think it's a fallacy. There is plenty of overlap. Most engaged 
>>> operators are already ATCs, and more and more contributors have 
>>> operational experience. Data points show that when people with more 
>>> operational background have nominated themselves for the TC in 
>>> recent elections, they got elected. 10 of the 13 TC seats are 
>>> currently occupied by people with some decent amount of operational 
>>> experience.
>>>
>>> So yes, we clearly need to communicate that people with 
>>> operational/usage experience are wanted in that new body. We need to 
>>> communicate that there is a change, and a single body will now 
>>> steward all aspects of the open source projects and not just the 
>>> upstream aspects. But I'm not obsessing on the fact that a single 
>>> election would somehow suppress operator voices...
>>>
>>> The problem recently has more been to find enough people willing to 
>>> step up and spend extra time stewarding OpenStack, than to actually 
>>> get elected.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>>>
>>
>
> Allison Price <mailto:allison at openstack.org>
> February 25, 2020 at 11:57 AM
>
>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20200225/4c6150d6/attachment-0001.html>