Open Stack

Thanks Rocky.

I'm very much in favour of an ecosystem model that has well defined
boundaries. It provide a much more scalable model for development

*​*​
Roland


On 27 March 2015 at 07:08, Rochelle Grober <rochelle.grober at huawei.com>
wrote:

>  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
>
>
>
>
>