Open Stack

On 06/09/2014 03:17 PM, Eoghan Glynn wrote:
> 
> 
>>>> So there are certain words that mean certain things, most don't, some do.
>>>>
>>>> If words that mean certain things are used then some folks start using
>>>> the word and have expectations around the word and the OpenStack
>>>> Technical Committee and other OpenStack programs find themselves on the
>>>> hook for behaviours that they didn't agree to.
>>>>
>>>> Currently the word under discussion is "certified" and its derivatives:
>>>> certification, certifying, and others with root word "certificate".
>>>>
>>>> This came to my attention at the summit with a cinder summit session
>>>> with the one of the cerficiate words in the title. I had thought my
>>>> point had been made but it appears that there needs to be more
>>>> discussion on this. So let's discuss.
>>>>
>>>> Let's start with the definition of certify:
>>>> cer·ti·fy
>>>> verb (used with object), cer·ti·fied, cer·ti·fy·ing.
>>>> 1. to attest as certain; give reliable information of; confirm: He
>>>> certified the truth of his claim.
>>>> 2. to testify to or vouch for in writing: The medical examiner will
>>>> certify his findings to the court.
>>>> 3. to guarantee; endorse reliably: to certify a document with an
>>>> official seal.
>>>> 4. to guarantee (a check) by writing on its face that the account
>>>> against which it is drawn has sufficient funds to pay it.
>>>> 5. to award a certificate to (a person) attesting to the completion of a
>>>> course of study or the passing of a qualifying examination.
>>>> Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/certify
>>>>
>>>> The issue I have with the word certify is that it requires someone or a
>>>> group of someones to attest to something. The thing attested to is only
>>>> as credible as the someone or the group of someones doing the attesting.
>>>> We have no process, nor do I feel we want to have a process for
>>>> evaluating the reliability of the somones or groups of someones doing
>>>> the attesting.
>>>>
>>>> I think that having testing in place in line with other programs testing
>>>> of patches (third party ci) in cinder should be sufficient to address
>>>> the underlying concern, namely reliability of opensource hooks to
>>>> proprietary code and/or hardware. I would like the use of the word
>>>> "certificate" and all its roots to no longer be used in OpenStack
>>>> programs with regard to testing. This won't happen until we get some
>>>> discussion and agreement on this, which I would like to have.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your participation,
>>>> Anita.
>>>
>>> Hi Anita,
>>>
>>> Just a note on cross-posting to both the os-dev and os-tc lists.
>>>
>>> Anyone not on the TC who will hits reply-all is likely to see their
>>> post be rejected by the TC list moderator, but go through to the
>>> more open dev list.
>>>
>>> As a result, the thread diverges (as we saw with the recent election
>>> stats/turnout thread).
>>>
>>> Also, moderation rejects are an unpleasant user experience.
>>>
>>> So if a post is intended to reach out for input from the wider dev
>>> community, it's better to post *only* to the -dev list, or vice versa
>>> if you want to interact with a narrower audience.
>> My post was intended to include the tc list in the discussion
>>
>> I have no say in what posts the tc email list moderator accepts or does
>> not, or how those posts not accepted are informed of their status.
> 
> Well the TC list moderation policy isn't so much the issue here, as the
> practice of cross-posting between open- and closed-moderation lists.
> 
> Even absent strict moderation being applied, as hasn't been the case for
> this thread, cross-posting still tends to cause divergence of threads due
> to moderator-lag and individuals choosing not to cross-post their replies.
> 
> The os-dev subscriber list should be a strict super-set of the os-tc list,
> so anything posted just to the former will naturally be visible to the TC
> membership also.
> 
> Thanks,
> Eoghan
> 
I think you need to start a new topic with your thoughts on how the
email lists should be organized. This particular conversation doesn't
have much to do with the topic at hand anymore.

Thanks Eoghan,
Anita.