Open Stack

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 9:14 AM, Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov> wrote:
> How about stated this way,
> Its the tc's responsibility to get it done. Either by delegating the activity, or by doing it themselves. But either way, it needs to get done. Its a ball that has been dropped too much in OpenStacks history. If no one is ultimately responsible, balls will keep getting dropped.
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin

I see the role of TC the same way I do the PTL hat, but on more of a
meta scale: too much direct involvement can stifle things. On the
inverse, not enough involvement can result in people saying one's work
is legacy, to be nice, or dead, at worst.

All too often, we humans get hung up on the definitions of words,
sometimes to the point of inaction. It seems only when someone says
sod it do things move forward, regardless of anyone's level of
involvement.

I look to TC as the group that sets the tone, de facto product owners,
to paraphrase from OpenStack's native tongue. The more hands-on an
individual is with the output, TC or not, a perception arises that a
given effort needs only that person's attention; thereby, setting a
much different narrative than might otherwise be immediately noticed
or desired.

The place I see TC is making sure that there is meaningful progress on
agreed-upon efforts, however that needs to exist. Sometimes that might
be recruiting, but I don't see browbeating social media to be
particularly valuable from an individual standpoint. Sometimes that
would be collaborating through code, if it comes down to it. From an
overarching perspective, I view hands-on coding by TC to be somewhat
of a last resort effort due to individual commitments.

Perceptions surrounding actions, like the oft used 'stepping up'
phrase, creates an effect where people do not carve out enough time to
effect change, becoming too busy, repeat ad infinitum.

Best,
Samuel