Open Stack

Roland,

I like your proposal.  I think the TC and PTLs would love it if there were a “contract” that defines vendor and PTL responsibilities and interactions.  It also could prove useful to other groups in the OpenStack community.  And it would take the load off of individual developers who have taken responsibility to maintain wiki pages, etc.  It could also be the start of a “vendor contributor” portal.

I think this would be worth our group working on.

--Rocky

From: Roland Chan [mailto:roland at aptira.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 18:37
To: Rochelle Grober
Cc: product-wg at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [Product] FW: Prevent another "Cinder drivers fiasco"

​
Anyway, here are the email threads.  How can Product WG make this better for next time and for the next time new processes get rolled out to vendors?

We could define a model for interaction that behaves like a support contract. That's really the outcome we're after isn't it?

The key features of this would be:

- contact points that aren't people, but aliases or groups
- technical and non-technical/product contact points
- an escalation point in the event of any difficulties arising (like this instance)
- a commitment from the vendor to respond to important messages within a specified time.

It's important to make the response time commitment in order to drive the required behaviour within the vendor organisation, at least that's my experience of both sides of that particular fence. Now that the cost of not maintaining contact has been demonstrated, I imagine it should be fairly easy to garner agreement from the vendor community to formalise support arrangement for their code.

Roland