Open Stack

Thank you all for your support. I strongly believe that all OpenStack users that have expressed that they do not feel recognized as members of the community will start to have a better feeling after we complete this work. As Governance, both TC and UC are equality important and make sense to start collaborating very tight and harmonically.

For instance, the reference in tweeter for the governance will be a clear example where both TC and UC could share their interests and opinions.

For the repo, it seems that the work is doable and there are already some commits to provide more granularity to the governance one. (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/296141/)

Kind Regards,

Edgar

From: Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com>
Date: Wednesday, June 1, 2016 at 11:40 AM
To: Anne Gentle <annegentle at justwriteclick.com>
Cc: Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com>, "openstack-tc at lists.openstack.org" <openstack-tc at lists.openstack.org>, Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com>, "user-committee at lists.openstack.org" <user-committee at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [User-committee] [openstack-tc] Adding UC charter to OpenStack Governance


On Jun 1, 2016, at 11:28 AM, Anne Gentle <annegentle at justwriteclick.com<mailto:annegentle at justwriteclick.com>> wrote:



On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:18 PM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com<mailto:doug at doughellmann.com>> wrote:

On Jun 1, 2016, at 10:57 AM, Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com<mailto:rbryant at redhat.com>> wrote:


On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Edgar Magana <edgar.magana at workday.com<mailto:edgar.magana at workday.com>> wrote:
Russell,

All those references can be fixed. We do not feel like an impediment for this proposal.
In terms of alternatives, we believe that this is the best and mostly the correct way to move forward.

​We can certainly fix the references we control.  Others we do not control.

One example: https://twitter.com/search?f=tweets&q=governance.openstack.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_search-3Ff-3Dtweets-26q-3Dgovernance.openstack.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc&r=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ&m=sdQe6F82ShcIYjA-K6yju63d7dYcVw7NKS1qFn3M68A&s=99seUZPnlUal3ZgMCyvuDidbSw-p0WTKlYaF3zumw5s&e=>​

​To be clear, I understand and support the idea that you want some kind of "equal footing" with the TC's documentation.

I’m not sure combining these sources into the same repo makes sense from an “ownership” perspective.

The existing content includes TC resolutions and project rules. Because of the nature of the content, we’ve limited roll call reviewers and merge access to the TC and TC chair respectively. It seems like the UC is going to want similar control over their own content, and doing that would be simpler using a separate repository published to a separate site. We don’t put any board content in the existing repo either, so it’s not like having a separate repo would be unequal or disadvantaging the UC.

I’d be happy to help with the work of setting up a sphinx repo to publish a separate site for the UC if you want a hand.

Sure, we'll have to have more reviewers and so on, but the docs site has had to adjust and I think we should too. No new subdomains are required to get to our end goals I believe.

The point is more that I think it would mix two sets of unrelated content. Unless we’re talking about separate repositories that are published to a subtree under the governance domain?

Doug



Anne



Doug


_______________________________________________
User-committee mailing list
User-committee at lists.openstack.org<mailto:User-committee at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.openstack.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_user-2Dcommittee&d=CwMFaQ&c=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc&r=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ&m=sdQe6F82ShcIYjA-K6yju63d7dYcVw7NKS1qFn3M68A&s=75lYwP4ao1b6ZuvLr1WUtbeeqksFpFjzedIL7E_uC3c&e=>



--
Anne Gentle
www.justwriteclick.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.justwriteclick.com_&d=CwMFaQ&c=DS6PUFBBr_KiLo7Sjt3ljp5jaW5k2i9ijVXllEdOozc&r=G0XRJfDQsuBvqa_wpWyDAUlSpeMV4W1qfWqBfctlWwQ&m=sdQe6F82ShcIYjA-K6yju63d7dYcVw7NKS1qFn3M68A&s=js3E0KBo6NI8MBt9LfnyNNZh8wmyYw2npFGMtz3Quy8&e=>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/user-committee/attachments/20160601/61257961/attachment-0001.html>