Open Stack

Rocky - It looks like we're good to go. Can you modify the user committee file as a patch to include our repo?

Thanks
Carol

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Bell [mailto:Tim.Bell at cern.ch] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 12:17 AM
To: Tom Fifield; user-committee at lists.openstack.org; Allamaraju, Subbu; Jon Proulux
Subject: Re: [User-committee] Approval/support for Product WG to be a project under User Committee


I would be in favour of the approach as outlined (with Tom's comment included)

Tim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Fifield [mailto:tom at openstack.org]
> Sent: 07 July 2015 06:49
> To: user-committee at lists.openstack.org; Tim Bell; Allamaraju, Subbu; 
> Jon Proulux
> Subject: Re: [User-committee] Approval/support for Product WG to be a 
> project under User Committee
> 
> This matches what we discussed at the summit.
> 
> Tim/Subbu/Jon, can you give an official nod?
> 
> 
> Suggestion for your wording change - use "Working Group" rather than 
> "project" to keep in-line with what we've been using so far.
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Tom
> 
> On 07/07/15 10:26, Rochelle Grober wrote:
> > Hey, folks.
> >
> >
> >
> > The Product Working Group is in the process of trying to get a 
> > repository instantiated for User Stories (hopefully at
> > openstack/openstack-user-stories) and in the process of walking 
> > through the process, found it would be much simpler to actually form 
> > a project that owns the repository.  Once that was realized, it was 
> > suggested (thanks Thierry!) that the likely best location for us 
> > would be under the auspices of the User Committee.
> >
> >
> >
> > With the committee’s ok, I’d like to modify the current patch commit 
> > message, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/197754/ to read:
> >
> >
> >
> > “The Product Working group would like to be formally recognized as a 
> > project within the User Committee governance body.”
> >
> >
> >
> > And would change the file to be modified to be the 
> > openstack/governance/reference/user-committee-repos.yaml with the 
> > group’s information.
> >
> >
> >
> > What do you guys think?  The patch is under discussion at tomorrow’s 
> > meeting, but if I get a generally positive response from the list, I 
> > will be able to at least propose that the current patch be abandoned 
> > for one that puts the Product WG under the auspices of the User
> Committee.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Rocky Grober (on behalf of the Product Working Group)
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > User-committee mailing list
> > User-committee at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
> >

_______________________________________________
User-committee mailing list
User-committee at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee