I'd like to attend, i will be commuting during the meeting hours
getting to work - my connection will be choppy but i can listen in.
On 12/5/14, 2:20 PM, Pierre-Luc Dion wrote:
GTM if voice required although, wouldn't make more sense to use
#cloudstack-meeting as it keep record of discussions and is the regular
channel? either way, I will be in on 10 Dec 16 UTC
On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote:
Agreed
-----Original Message-----
From: williamstev...@gmail.com [mailto:williamstev...@gmail.com] On
Behalf Of Will Stevens
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 2:41 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Steve Wilson
Subject: Re: CloudStack Quality Process
I am speaking as a committer who has limited insight into the 'correct'
way to do
this via Apache (so be gentle). :)
I like the idea of a wiki page to help get everyone on the same page and
to track
the consensus as we move forward...
I also agree that it is hard to come to a consensus on the list because
it is really
hard to have a constructive conversation on here in a timely manner
where the
different voices can be heard.
I think it would be interesting to schedule sessions/meetings on the
list so any
interested party can join. These sessions/meetings would happen in a
format
like IRC where the transcript of the session can be later posted to the
list as well
as a summary of the transcript so it can be reviewed by any member who
could
not make the meeting. This way we keep all of the actual conversation
in the
list, but we also make it easier to actually have a 'conversation' at
the same time.
It is hard to beat real time when working through this sort of stuff.
Does this make sense to others? Thoughts?
Will
*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer
*CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw
@CloudOps_
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote:
Wearing my PMC hat and with past experience on these discussions we
have not made much progress on mailing list despite agreeing on the
goals and have locked horns. One possibility after reading Chip's
email and concerns I see is that, we create a wiki outlining the
problem space, possible
solution(s) and their specific pros and cons and have people
collaborate.
Once a general consensus is there and wiki is stable we can bring it
back to the mailing list for final approval. This is open as well as
requires participant a higher degree of commitment to collaborate and
will be more structured.
Thanks
Animesh
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Chip Childers
<chipchild...@apache.org>
wrote:
Steve,
(Speaking with my PMC hat on, but not as someone that has the time
to help with this process)
I love the idea of moving forward with resolving some of the
quality process / tooling / etc... challenges that we face as a
project and community. I also love the idea that companies getting
commercial value from this project are talking (as companies)
about how to best support the project through either directing
their employees to work on this problem, allowing those interested
the time to do so, and / or offering (as Citrix did) required
hardware/software resources to make improvements for the common
good. Importantly, I like that the companies involved are
mutually agreeing that this is for the common good.
That said, I have a concern about the outline below, specifically
in how the definition of approach and eventual execution are
handled.
The proposal of taking this off-list until there is a "proposal to
ratify"
is what I'd like to see changed. I would fully expect that a
fleshed out proposal hitting the list would be met with more
discussion than you would like (and perhaps even met with
frustration).
What has worked well for us in the past, where there is a need to
have those interested in "doing work" to be able to focus on that
work, has been to start with a call for interested parties (as you
did). Then, using a combination of threads on this list and "live"
meetings, make progress on defining the requirements and approach
incrementally.
Execution of any work should similarly be open and shared on this
list.
Throughout that process, allowing comments and openings for
participants are critical.
One of the things we learned about using "live" meetings to speed
up the consensus process in the past is to make sure that while
they are fantastic at allowing the participants to understand each
other, it's critical to remember that (1) there are no project
decisions made outside of the mailing lists and (2) that it's
important to have minutes or notes from those live meetings shared
with the community as
a
whole.
Now a very real concern that some of us have is getting bogged
down in arguments based on opinion, especially the "drive by"
opinions. This issue (plus challenges with people violently
agreeing with each other, yet talking past each other), is what I
believe has held up meaningful progress. To deal with this, I
suggest we all remember that projects at the ASF are about
supporting those that "DO", while giving opportunity for
participation and comment from those that might not currently be
"DOING". But those that are doing the work, and collaborating to
reach a shared goal, shouldn't let a lack of 100% consensus on
every
aspect hold back progress.
As someone who will not be "doing" anything for this effort, but
has an interest in maintaining this community's health and seeing
it continue to succeed, I hope my suggestions and comments are
helpful.
-chip
On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 07:12:27PM +0000, Steve Wilson wrote:
Hi Everyone,
It was great to get to see a number of you at the recent CCC in
Budapest.
While I was there, I got to meet face to face with individuals
working
for several
companies that have a real stake in the commercial success of the
CloudStack
project.
After joining Citrix (and becoming involved in CloudStack) about
a
year ago,
I’ve come to believe that we need to do more to mature our quality
practices
around this codebase. We all like to say #cloudstackworks (and it’s
true), but
this is a massive codebase that’s used in the most demanding
situations. We
have large telecommunications companies and enterprises who are
betting
their
businesses on this software. It has to be great!
There has been quite a bit of discussion on the mailing list in
recent months
about how we improve in this area. There is plenty of passion, but
we
haven’t
made enough concrete progress as a community. In my discussions
with key contributors as CCC, there was general agreement that the
DEV list isn’t
a good
forum for hashing out these kinds of things. Email is too
low-bandwidth
and too
impersonal.
At CCC, I discussed with several people the idea that we
commission a
small
sub team to go hash out a proposal for how we handle the following
topics within the ACS community (which can then be brought back to
the larger community for ratification):
* Continuous integration and test automation
* Gating of commits
* Overall commit workflow
We are looking for volunteers to commit to being part of this
team.
This
would imply a serious commitment. We don’t want hangers on or
observers.
This will entail real work and late night meetings. We’re looking
for
people who
are serious contributors to the codebase.
From Citrix, David Nalley and Animesh Chaturvedi have booth told
me
they’re
willing to commit to this project. They’ve both managed ACS
releases
and have
a really good view into the current process — and I know both are
passionate
about improving our process. From my CCC discussions, I believe
there
are
individuals from Schuberg Philis, Shape Blue and Cloud Ops who are
willing to
commit to this process.
If you are willing to be part of this team to drive forward our
community,
please reply here.
Thanks,
-Steve
Steve Wilson
VP & Product Unit Manager
Cloud Software
Citrix
@virtualsteve
--
Daan
