Open Stack

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119666/ is the first pass, I'll do a
catch up closer to the election if its required.

Michael

On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Anita Kuno <anteaya at anteaya.info> wrote:
> On 09/05/2014 11:38 PM, Michael Still wrote:
>> If I knew when you were going to generate the list of voting ATCs, I
>> would be happy to propose a review against extra-atcs which lists all
>> the co-authored-bys for nova before then. It would require a TC
>> review, but we're actually pretty fast at those for mechanical things.
>>
>> Michael
> This seems to be the easiest/fastest way to accomplish your goal.
>
> The electoral rolls will be generated after September 26, 2014 05:59
> UTC, so please have any and all changes merged to the extra-atcs file
> prior to that date/time to ensure those names are included in the
> intended projects for the ptl and tc electoral rolls. (The cut off date
> for eligibility is the same for both elections.)
>
> Thanks, let me know if there are any other questions/details I can help
> with,
> Anita.
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Anita Kuno <anteaya at anteaya.info> wrote:
>>> On 09/05/2014 07:44 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 5, 2014, at 7:09 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi.
>>>>>
>>>>> I bring this up because Nova has a large example of this in Juno, and
>>>>> I want to make sure we handle it nicely. If this is the wrong list,
>>>>> feel free to cc others.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to see co-authored-by confer ATC status. Or, I'd like to at
>>>>> least see a discussion on if it should.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is of interest for me because the ironic nova driver is in the
>>>>> process of merging, and we've used co-authored-by to acknowledge the
>>>>> contributions of the various authors when we lose the git history from
>>>>> the remote repository. It think its a nice touch, but I'd also like to
>>>>> see those authors get ATC.
>>>>
>>>> I thought this was already the case, actually. Absolutely +1 if not.
>>>>
>>> Jeremy can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe this is the script
>>> that he uses to create the electoral roll:
>>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/config/tree/tools/atc/email_stats.py
>>> This script generates the list of emails I need to use for the poll to
>>> add the emails of the electorate.
>>>
>>> So one option is to offer a patch to extend that script to include
>>> co-authored by if we can find a gerrit query that will give results for
>>> Co-Authored. (I'm working on it and have come up empty thus far:
>>> https://review.openstack.org/Documentation/user-search.html) If we did
>>> this we should probably also ensure a governance resolution is merged
>>> prior to September 26, 2014 05:59 UTC identifying that the definition of
>>> "members who committed a change to a repository" as outlined in the
>>> charter is expanded to include co-authored by, just to dot all the i's
>>> and cross all the t's.
>>>
>>> Another option is to submit a list of names of contributors that have
>>> status by way of co-authored-by but not by owner of a commit as
>>> extra-atc contributors.
>>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/extra-atcs
>>> There is already a mechanism to include names in this file, both by
>>> governance decision and the above script. This would require the list of
>>> names to be compiled by nova, submitted to the tc and merged to the
>>> extra-atc file prior to September 26, 2014 05:59 UTC. There is time for
>>> this to happen.
>>>
>>> My input is based on finding options to make the technical/governance
>>> side of this work. I have no opinion on whether this should be
>>> undertaken as that decision is up to the tc.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Anita.
>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
Rackspace Australia