Open Stack

On 15/11/2014 1:46 am, "Jeremy Stanley" <fungi at yuggoth.org> wrote:
> the truth is that work on these projects is entirely
> voluntary and we have no effective way to enforce a decree like
> that.

I don't think that's entirely correct. A large, potentially overwhelming,
majority of committers seem to be paid to work on OpenStack. Proof of this
is that we manage to commit to and deliver a large number of features
according to a rigorous schedule.

I do agree that we do not have a way to enforce this but the community
could find one, I'm sure. The community is bound by its own rules and needs
to decide whether retiring technical debt is a priority. If it is, then a
means of commitment to that goal must be established. That will slow down
feature development since the resource pool is finite, and that is no bad
thing.

> Also, because English is a terribly, terribly nuanced language, I
> actually read that "may" as granting permission, not stating an
> optional imperative in the RFC sense.

And that is correct but it isn't desirable, at least not to me.

Roland
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20141115/362667b2/attachment.html>