Open Stack

I was thinking about this, and I think that we should do a spec for
the proposed changes in our shiny new spec repo when we've finished
the discussion round. That will force us to publicly document things
like the problem we think we're solving, which is important for
explaining any changes we make to ATCs.

Michael

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> Joe Gordon wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org
>> <mailto:thierry at openstack.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi, fellow TC members,
>>
>>     After a noisy ML thread, opinionated blogposts, and strawmen on Gerrit,
>>     we are at a stage where we seek potential convergence between TC members
>>     around a common proposal (before we put it in words and RFC to the wider
>>     community). This phase started as informal in-person discussions in
>>     Paris, and we set up TC 5-members hangouts (2 so far) to continue that
>>     discussion over a high-bandwidth medium. This email summarizes the
>>     progress so far for everyone to know.
>>
>>     Note that there is little point in commenting on this thread, the
>>     discussion is still very much at its early stages and we don't know yet
>>     what the final proposal will be (nor if it will be truly consensual
>>     amongst the TC members). At this point I prefer we continue to solidify
>>     it in high-bandwidth discussions between TC members.
>>
>>
>> I know you said there is little point in commenting on this thread, but
>> I do have one comment to add anyway.
>>
>> While I am excited to see the TC working towards a collective opinion.
>> There is one group that I would really like to hear from in this debate,
>> the ATC community (including stackforge) as a whole.  IMHO TC members
>> and active community members alike are too close to the problem to see
>> all perspectives. Furthermore I don't know what the most common
>> opinion(s) is on project structure reform.
>>
>> To that end, I would like to propose polling ATC members to get some
>> rough numbers on where the community as a whole stands on this issue.
>> Based on the summary below it looks like project structure reform has
>> now been broken down into several smaller concrete questions, perhaps we
>> can take those and turn them into a poll. The results of this poll would
>> naturally be non-binding and only there to help the TC converge on a
>> solution.
>
> At this point the "concrete questions" are just artifacts in the
> difficult and long process of converging to a potential solution, so I
> think it's too early to poll. We haven't even included all TC members in
> that discussion yet, and some points are very likely to completely
> disappear at the next iteration. I posted this status report for
> transparency, but it is far from being anything solid yet.
>
> There have been a number of proposals posted already (in blog posts, on
> Gerrit), but mostly by individuals. This exercise is to see if there
> could be a middle ground between those individual proposals. I'm
> optimistic that there can be (since I would hate to come down to a close
> vote on such an important issue), but I fear that polling on
> intermediate steps of that discussion will only disrupt that delicate
> process and bring us back to a polarized debate where no one will bulge.
>
> I'm hoping we can get to something we can propose and RFC on by the end
> of this month.
>
> --
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-TC mailing list
> OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc



-- 
Rackspace Australia