Open Stack

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>wrote:

> Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >> Making our multiple projects converge onto consolidated and
> >> well-accepted APIs is a bit painful work, but it is a prerequisite to
> >> turning openstack-common into a proper library (or set of libraries).
> >>
> >> I'd say the whole thing suffers from not having a proper
> >> team/leader/coordinator dedicated to it: relying on existing,
> >> overstretched PTLs to lead that effort might not be the fastest path.
> >
> > While I was on vacation, I read in the weekly newsletter:
> >
> >   "It developed into a request for leadership for openstack-common"
> >
> > and was like "WTF do you call the work that e.g. I, Jason, Russell and
> > Doug have been doing?"
> >
> > But I see your point is a little different - you feel there should be an
> > elected/appointed "PTL without a PPB vote" or whatever to represent the
> > project. I guess that could help clarify things since it's what folks
> > are used to with other projects.
>
> Right. So far we said that openstack-common was driven by "all the
> PTLs", but that didn't prove particularly fast and efficient. Having a
> clear face associated with it, someone specific taking the "lead" on
> this project, will, I think, help a bit in getting to the next step.


Sorry if this rekindles old arguments, but could someone summarize the
reasons for an openstack-common "PTL" without voting rights? I would have
defaulted to giving them a vote *especially* because the code in common is,
well, common to all of the projects.

Doug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20120723/d4885619/attachment.html>