Open Stack

I think Doug has answered most of the answers brilliantly and I will just
cut some of the cases that are important from my own perspective.

@Jeremy :
The purpose of the SIG is try to solve a much bigger problem than the small
fixes/padding/trolling whatever names we call them.

But let me once again double down on the padding issue one last time coz it
disheartens me very much that some of the tone in that thread somehow treat
us as the agitators who vile people.

I could categorically and unequivocally say it is not one of the
motivations, but the sole motivation behind what Matt raised in that
thread. Evidence ? Check out the screen capture I did on the abandoned
patches right after we warn the local group to stop this[0]. The image is
in low res but anyone could see how many small patches were proposed to how
many projects. I have counted more than 300 this kind of small patches
abandoned in a mass exodus that day.

And thing is that this is not new. We encountered this epic meltdown[1]
last year and it was so huge of en event that OSCAR, one of the biggest
Chinese open source associations, published an manifesto[2] on advocating
good contributions to the OpenStack community with a great number of local
companies co-sign .We even experienced similar things in other
communities[3] with similar patterns.

So it is not people like us making fuss about a trivial issue, or that we
are the horrible intolerant ones that thinks people in the worst ways. We
can call it what it is because we know of first hand knowledge.


If the governance body of the community, be it TC or Board or others,
continue to fail to adopt an effective method on this issue, two outcomes
will most likely happen: (1) good quality devs will be driven away by
the Gresham's
Law[4] and (2) things will start to get worse, the community will be bogged
down with more costly trolling activities than [1].

The First Contact SIG proposed by Doug and Ildiko is most reasonable and
actionable solution I could envision so far.

@Thierry:
Yes the mentors are far from organized and numerically enough, for example
we barely feel its existence in China. The mentors cannot be some one that
is only reachable via IRC or at the summit. It should be proper-trained
local developers that could provide f2f offline help. That is why the local
chapter leads are so important in this matter. They are the real and flesh
that first-comers could come to instead of testing waters via any strange
activities.




[0]
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1I3SIn4D9av7m8kZYM_rgm56UO9s8Sq-oE324Kv_svnM/edit?usp=sharing
[1]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-December/109294.html
[2]http://www.sohu.com/a/126600482_610730
[3]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2016-August/012305.html
[4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gresham%27s_law

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:41 AM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com>
wrote:

> Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2017-09-25 16:51:28 +0100:
> > Zhipeng Huang wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > *Goals*:
> > > 1. To serve as the first contact point when project develop team
> finding
> > > something extraordinary.
> > > 2. To serve as the first contact point for local community to reach out
> > > to the dev community, whether it is first-comer onboarding, language
> > > translation issue, culture issue, etc.
> > > 3. To enable groups like Upstream Institute to maximize their
> > > capabilities on helping individuals, especially first-comers.
> > > 4. To enable local chapters could get a direct line with the dev
> > > community (not the foundation governance layer since we already have
> > > many links on that level) without involvement of more  non-tech
> interest
> > > parties.
> > > 5 To work with Linux Foundation CHAOSS program on project merit
> > > identification.
> > > [...]
> > Frankly, I'm wondering how much of these issues would be solved (and
> > then some) by encouraging more *mentoring*. What people need (whether
> > they come from different cultures, or they come with only little time to
> > dedicate to the project) is a direct contact with a friendly human
> > helping them to figure it out.
> >
> > We have always had mentors in OpenStack under one form or another.
> > Should we reinvigorate that effort ? Not completely sure a SIG is the
> > best format for that (since it's more of a helpdesk thing than a group
> > newcomers would join for the long-term).
> >
>
> Well, my idea for this group was that it was specifically intended to
> help newcomers find where to go next. Part of that might be pairing them
> with a mentor of some sort. I think actually managing a mentoring
> program is probably a large enough responsibility that it deserves its
> own group (SIG, WG, whatever).
>
> Doug
>
> _______________________________________________
> openstack-sigs mailing list
> openstack-sigs at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-sigs
>



-- 
Zhipeng (Howard) Huang

Standard Engineer
IT Standard & Patent/IT Product Line
Huawei Technologies Co,. Ltd
Email: huangzhipeng at huawei.com
Office: Huawei Industrial Base, Longgang, Shenzhen

(Previous)
Research Assistant
Mobile Ad-Hoc Network Lab, Calit2
University of California, Irvine
Email: zhipengh at uci.edu
Office: Calit2 Building Room 2402

OpenStack, OPNFV, OpenDaylight, OpenCompute Aficionado
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-sigs/attachments/20170926/a69a2639/attachment.html>