Open Stack

> On Nov 4, 2015, at 6:24 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi TC members,
> 
> We discussed this before, and I had it on the open discussion agenda for
> yesterdays meeting. We have projects that are candidate for the big tent
> but get delayed for various reasons (start of activity, adoption of
> community practices, alignment with other teams...). Rather than leave
> that project alone, or expect all TC members to keep track of progress,
> we should have one mentor TC member for each such projects that will:
> 
> - follow up on progress in alignment for that project
> - provide advice to the candidate project team on how to address the gap
> - propose the project back on the TC meeting docket when they estimate
> it's ready for reconsideration
> 
> The following projects had their original application delayed:
> 
> * Compass (needs to adopt more of the OpenStack way)
> * Fuel (needs more collaboration)
> * Kiloeyes (no activity yet)
> * Monasca (needs to adopt more of the OpenStack way)
> * Juju charms (no activity yet, question on GPLv3 licensing)
> * Kosmos (no activity yet)
> 
> NB: Group Based Policy was proposed earlier but it was set to WIP by its
> proposers themselves, so I don't include it in the list.
> 
> Jay mentioned that Fuel is ready to be reconsidered and that Dmitry
> provided direct updates to the ML already, so maybe it doesn't need a
> formal mentor (we should assign one if it's delayed again next week).
> 
> We also said we should reconsider Monasca ASAP, anyone volunteering to
> dive into that and confirm it's ready for reconsideration ?
> 
> The others are likely to take a bit more time, but would still benefit
> greatly from having a TC mentor following them up starting now. I can
> take Juju charms (since I already asked for legal feedback on the
> licensing there). Anyone volunteering for Compass, Kiloeyes or Kosmos ?

I'd be happy to follow Kosmos.

Russell