Open Stack

Melvin, based on latest doodle (as of now), the preferred option seems to
be tomorrow May 31st, 9am (pacific)?
[6] https://doodle.com/poll/2f3wwm9mizyqv5m7
<https://doodle.com/poll/2f3wwm9mizyqv5m7>
Can you please confirm? Thanks!

On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 3:58 PM, Melvin Hillsman <mrhillsman at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hey everyone, apologies for my delay in responding Thierry and Doug, been
> out of pocket for about a week. I like getting the wording together. Please
> use the proposed dates as just opportunities for us to get together if
> necessary or required.
>
> > On May 29, 2017, at 10:30, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> >
> > Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >>
> >>> On May 23, 2017, at 9:40 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Melvin Hillsman wrote:
> >>>> Thank you all who were able to attend the Forum session on unanswered
> >>>> requirements. Based our discussion we decided to draft up a proposal
> for
> >>>> SIGs (special interest groups)[1] along with a governance model based
> >>>> off draft by UC for teams/wgs [2] whose outputs would follow a
> workflow
> >>>> proposed by the product working group (team)[3]. Proposals are tracked
> >>>> via the proposed feature tracker[4] and work via storyboard[5].
> >>>>
> >>>> Can we get together to ensure that we continue on the momentum of the
> >>>> discussion(s) during the Forum and hash out any further items around
> the
> >>>> proposal and get it to the mailing lists for feedback from the
> community?[6]
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for pushing this, Melvin! Just replied to the Doodle poll.
> >>>
> >>> On the workgroup/SIG side, I think we need to be careful not to put too
> >>> many procedural barriers preventing work to be organically done (for
> >>> example, force a need to have a workgroup blessed before it can do
> >>> anything).
> >>>
> >>> My preferred approach would be to keep TC-driven project teams (for
> >>> upstream development) and UC-driven workgroups (for subgroups working
> on
> >>> UC-driven initiatives, like Ops-tags or the AUC recognition). We would
> >>> create a "SIG" concept for everything else (including API WG or Large
> >>> deployments WG) that just requires to be listed on a wiki page to
> exist.
> >>
> >> I like that.
> >>
> >> Does it make sense to work through some wording asynchronously before
> we try to schedule a meeting?
> >
> > Yes, I think that would be useful. Happy to help.
> >
> > --
> > Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/user-committee/attachments/20170530/234645dc/attachment-0001.html>