[Openstack-operators] [Openstack-sigs] Open letter/request to TC candidates (and existing elected officials)
rico.lin.guanyu at gmail.com
Tue Sep 18 01:58:36 UTC 2018
Hope you all safely travel back to home now.
Here is the summarize from some discussions (as much as I can trigger or
attend) in PTG for SIGs/WGs expose and some idea for action,
I also like the idea to at least expose the information of SIGs/WGs right
away. Feel free to give your feedback.
And not like the following message matters to anyone, but just in case. I
believe this is a goal for all group in the community so just don't let who
your duty, position, or full hand of good tasks to limit what you think
about the relative of this goal with you. Give your positive or negative
opinions to help us get a better shape.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:47 PM Matt Riedemann <mriedemos at gmail.com> wrote:
> Rather than take a tangent on Kristi's candidacy thread , I'll bring
> this up separately.
> Kristi said:
> "Ultimately, this list isn’t exclusive and I’d love to hear your and
> other people's opinions about what you think the I should focus on."
> Well since you asked...
> Some feedback I gave to the public cloud work group yesterday was to get
> their RFE/bug list ranked from the operator community (because some of
> the requests are not exclusive to public cloud), and then put pressure
> on the TC to help project manage the delivery of the top issue. I would
> like all of the SIGs to do this. The upgrades SIG should rank and
> socialize their #1 issue that needs attention from the developer
> community - maybe that's better upgrade CI testing for deployment
> projects, maybe it's getting the pre-upgrade checks goal done for Stein.
> The UC should also be doing this; maybe that's the UC saying, "we need
> help on closing feature gaps in openstack client and/or the SDK". I
> don't want SIGs to bombard the developers with *all* of their
> requirements, but I want to get past *talking* about the *same* issues
> *every* time we get together. I want each group to say, "this is our top
> issue and we want developers to focus on it." For example, the extended
> maintenance resolution  was purely birthed from frustration about
> talking about LTS and stable branch EOL every time we get together. It's
> also the responsibility of the operator and user communities to weigh in
> on proposed release goals, but the TC should be actively trying to get
> feedback from those communities about proposed goals, because I bet
> operators and users don't care about mox removal .
> I want to see the TC be more of a cross-project project management
> group, like a group of Ildikos and what she did between nova and cinder
> to get volume multi-attach done, which took persistent supervision to
> herd the cats and get it delivered. Lance is already trying to do this
> with unified limits. Doug is doing this with the python3 goal. I want my
> elected TC members to be pushing tangible technical deliverables forward.
> I don't find any value in the TC debating ad nauseam about visions and
> constellations and "what is openstack?". Scope will change over time
> depending on who is contributing to openstack, we should just accept
> this. And we need to realize that if we are failing to deliver value to
> operators and users, they aren't going to use openstack and then "what
> is openstack?" won't matter because no one will care.
> So I encourage all elected TC members to work directly with the various
> SIGs to figure out their top issue and then work on managing those
> deliverables across the community because the TC is particularly well
> suited to do so given the elected position. I realize political and
> bureaucratic "how should openstack deal with x?" things will come up,
> but those should not be the priority of the TC. So instead of
> philosophizing about things like, "should all compute agents be in a
> single service with a REST API" for hours and hours, every few months -
> immediately ask, "would doing that get us any closer to achieving top
> technical priority x?" Because if not, or it's so fuzzy in scope that no
> one sees the way forward, document a decision and then drop it.
>  https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/rocky/mox_removal.html
> openstack-sigs mailing list
> openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org
May The Force of OpenStack Be With You,
*Rico Lin*irc: ricolin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-operators