On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Doug Hellmann <d...@doughellmann.com> wrote:
> > On Aug 13, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Eoghan Glynn <egl...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > >>> At the end of the day, that's probably going to mean saying No to more > >>> things. Everytime I turn around everyone wants the TC to say No to > >>> things, just not to their particular thing. :) Which is human nature. > >>> But I think if we don't start saying No to more things we're going to > >>> end up with a pile of mud that no one is happy with. > >> > >> That we're being so abstract about all of this is frustrating. I get > >> that no-one wants to start a flamewar, but can someone be concrete about > >> what they feel we should say 'no' to but are likely to say 'yes' to? > >> > >> > >> I'll bite, but please note this is a strawman. > >> > >> No: > >> * Accepting any more projects into incubation until we are comfortable > with > >> the state of things again > >> * Marconi > >> * Ceilometer > > > > Well -1 to that, obviously, from me. > > > > Ceilometer is on track to fully execute on the gap analysis coverage > > plan agreed with the TC at the outset of this cycle, and has an active > > plan in progress to address architectural debt. > > Yes, there seems to be an attitude among several people in the community > that the Ceilometer team denies that there are issues and refuses to work > on them. Neither of those things is the case from our perspective. > Totally agree. > > Can you be more specific about the shortcomings you see in the project > that aren’t being addressed? > Once again, this is just a strawman. I'm just not sure OpenStack has 'blessed' the best solution out there. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Ceilometer/Graduation#Why_we_think_we.27re_ready " - Successfully passed the challenge of being adopted by 3 related projects which have agreed to join or use ceilometer: - Synaps - Healthnmon - StackTach <https://wiki.openstack.org/w/index.php?title=StackTach&action=edit&redlink=1> " Stacktach seems to still be under active development ( http://git.openstack.org/cgit/stackforge/stacktach/log/), is used by rackspace in production and from everything I hear is more mature then ceilometer. > > > > >> Divert all cross project efforts from the following projects so we can > focus > >> our cross project resources. Once we are in a bitter place we can > expand our > >> cross project resources to cover these again. This doesn't mean removing > >> anything. > >> * Sahara > >> * Trove > >> * Tripleo > > > > You write as if cross-project efforts are both of fixed size and > > amenable to centralized command & control. > > > > Neither of which is actually the case, IMO. > > > > Additional cross-project resources can be ponied up by the large > > contributor companies, and existing cross-project resources are not > > necessarily divertable on command. > Sure additional cross-project resources can and need to be ponied up, but I am doubtful that will be enough. > > What “cross-project efforts” are we talking about? The liaison program in > Oslo has been a qualified success so far. Would it make sense to extend > that to other programs and say that each project needs at least one > designated QA, Infra, Doc, etc. contact? > > Doug > > > > >> Yes: > >> * All integrated projects that are not listed above > > > > And what of the other pending graduation request? > > > > Cheers, > > Eoghan > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
