Open Stack

On 12/12/2013 08:24 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Hi fellow members of the TC,
> 
> We now have a set of 10 potential names for the J release [1], and need
> to pick the best method to select the winner. Historically we held a
> Launchpad poll (~openstack group) over a refined set of 4-5 options. The
> problem is, we don't really use the Launchpad ~openstack group anymore
> (used to be the subscribers to the openstack ML) and the group was
> therefore closed... so that's no longer the "less worse" option.
> 
> A few proposed solutions:
> 
> 1. "Public" CIVS vote, accessible to everyone with the link
> Easy to set up, but vote is limited to one per IP address, which can
> block legitimate voters while encouraging ballot stuffing.
> 
> 2a. Private CIVS vote, link sent to openstack-dev subscribers
> A bit painful to set up (need to extract the 2926 subscribers emails,
> then feed them to CIVS by batches of less than 1000), but at least it's
> not gameable. One difference is that receiving a private vote email will
> result in more participation than the only-announced-on-ML Launchpad poll.
> 
> 2b. Private CIVS vote, link sent to openstack list subscribers
> More painful to set up (8573 members), and CIVS advises against being
> used to run above "a couple thousands voters". That said it's probably
> the closest to the people who voted in the past (general list).
> 
> 3. Launchpad poll over ~openstack
> The OpenStack group is still there, so technically we could still refine
> the list to 4-5 candidates and set up a poll there. It's not as good as
> Condorcet though, and would be more like "the people who used to vote in
> previous names" than "the people who should vote now".
> 
> 4a. Screw popular voting, let's do a TC members condorcet
> Easy option. Might be seen as TC power landgrab, and it was funny to let
> the "people" decide.
> 
> 4b. Screw voting, let's pick Jekyll and be done with it
> A variant of the previous option in case of consensus.
> 
> I'm open to other suggestions :)
> 
> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReleaseNaming

If we can make 2b work (openstack list), I would prefer that.  If we
need to scale down the voting pool, 2a (openstack-dev list) seems to be
the next best choice.

Next I'd choose 4a.  The others just seem too broken.  I think a lot of
people may be disappointed, though.  Then again, we don't hold votes on
individual project names, so maybe it's not a big deal.

Another variant on 4:

4c. TC members condorcet, but after a mailing list thread that lays out
the options and asks everyone to speak up with their preferences to
influence the vote.

-- 
Russell Bryant