Open Stack

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2017-09-26 17:10:43 +0100:
> Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com wrote:
> > Melvin and Meta Sig,
> > 
> > Product team have a few questions to discuss.
> > 
> > 1.       Have SIGs defined a place for maintaining features/development
> > requirements proposals?
> > 
> > PWG have developed the Development Proposal workflow and we have an
> > existing repo that allow SIG/WGs to use.
> 
> No we haven't. We wanted to first get some SIGs up and see if they have
> common tracking needs. The PWG could definitely help in that area.
> 
> > 2.       Have META SIG considered driving requirements with input from
> > all SIGs/WGs?
> > 
> > We are contemplating of having a single place to drive
> > feature/requirement proposal for all SIGs/WGs so they are visible to all
> > other SIGs and WGs.
> 
> That sounds like a good idea. That said, one of the goals behind SIGs is
> that they are open to developer types as much as operator types, and
> therefore can be used as a vehicle to combine developer resources from
> like-minded organizations around a given topic. The SIG can come up with
> a common priority list and have all those "internal" development
> resources working together in implementing those priorities. If that's
> successful, there might not be as much need for external coordination
> and priority exposure.

This is important. If we look at SIGs as a way for users who are
otherwise disconnected from contributing to ask the community for
things without starting to contribute themselves, then the groups
are not going to be any more effective at meeting anyone's needs
than other similarly disconnected attempts have been in the past.

> 
> > 3.       For the requirements that are driven by the SIG do you have a
> > process defined on how to track progress and success?
> > PWG has a tracker tool for consideration, though the tool still requires
> > some manual update.
> 
> No, see (1).
>