confirmed On 07/10/14 10:06 PM, Adam Lawson wrote: > Hello everyone! > > I'll be perfectly straight and dedicate paragraph #1 to address the > painfully obvious. A number of you are probably reading this after seeing > 'TC Candidacy', looked at my name and wondered 'who is this guy?' In short, > I'm pretty low-key but I've been heavily involved in Openstack since the > Folsom release - advising, architecting and deploying Openstack-based > application clouds for numerous companies and end users. I'm probably a lot > like many of you in fact; not the loudest or most witty voice in the room, > I read more than I write, I don't bully ideas and I've never run for > anything in my life because I hate the spotlight. But the importance of > Openstack in the cloud marketplace is increasingly important as is the > integrity of its technical direction. So I'm going to step on a limb here > and enter the circle. > > My involvement has been primarily focused on large designs and deployments > of custom automated Openstack clouds. And while I am more than proficient > in Python and numerous other languages including .NET/J2EE and others, my > greatest pleasure has been architecting solutions that are powered by > Openstack. Focusing on that has really given me a unique perspective. Not > just on individual components and how they interact with each other, but > also how they collectively perform within the context of a heterogenous > hybrid cloud solution while adhering to industry best practices. This > perspective is one that I hope to bring to the technical committee if the > Openstack community is so inclined. Not only to shepherd how Openstack is > put together but to help enable an easier and more seamless adoption cycle > within the enterprise. > > Lastly in the spirit of full disclosure, I am the principal architect for > an Openstack consulting company I founded which strives for an accelerated > enterprise adoption of the open cloud through, in part, the successes of > Openstack. So one could say I am vested in Openstack in a pretty unique way > compared to most others. So where technical direction is concerned, I > believe I have a deep well of experience from which to draw via designing > and developing production Openstack clouds in the real world - day in and > day out - which I believe would be of immense value to the TC and the > community supporting the project itself. > > I know there are some really smart people who want to also serve on the TC > with focuses on various areas of Openstack and thankfully the committee was > designed to accommodate multiple unique perspectives for that very reason. > My hope is that the community chooses to include my program-agnostic > architectural influence to the TC while maintaining the same work ethic and > unyielding commitment to efforts that will deliver excellence to and within > the Openstack platform. > > So without any further adieu, below are my thoughts re the requested > questions and thanks for your consideration! > > *"My name is Adam Lawson, running for election to the Openstack Technical > Committee, and I approve this message."* ; ) > > *Topic: OpenStack Mission* > *How do you feel the technical community is doing in meeting the OpenStack > Mission?* > > *“To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will > meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being > simple to implement and massively scalable.”* > > The whole point of mission statements is merely to identify what we are > striving to achieve or accomplish within the organization. With that said, > I feel that technical leadership is the first step to accomplishing a > technical goal. So to that end, the existence of the TC is a positive first > step. But it's just one step or many more to come. > Within this particular TC cycle, I'd like to see the TC demonstrate > leadership to drive a reduction of lingering technical debt and address API > and module standardization. Openstack in its current form has a number of > challenges that are affecting our ability to scale and while some of this > can be solved organizationally, technical debt and standardization are > challenges that will not be easy to resolve and might not even be 100 > percent solvable within a single release cycle. But I look forward to how > the TC *will* shepherd improvements to both process and the product and > help drive the mission. > On a side note, "easy to implement" is still just a goal and the > engineering requirement to deploy and manage Openstack is still a > prohibitive hurdle for many organizations. But we have more than one tool > in front of us that will help us to help others who want to use Openstack > but .. can't. That's something I'd really like to see change soon. > > *Topic: Contributor Motivation* > *How would you characterize the various facets of contributor motivation?* > I like what I read earlier today: "People want to do work that matters and > enjoy doing it." This sums up Openstack contributors very well but it sums > up a lot of us too though, doesn't it. > Many of us are lucky enough to be able to work on Openstack full-time as a > job. There are many others who work with Openstack in the context of > Consumers, Users, Operators, Solutions Architects where it is not their > full-time job but they participate with the Openstack community because of > other reasons. Whatever the reason (philanthropy, my good looks), folks > want to work on what matters and if it doesn't matter, there is no > motivation to continue. > - I see friendly interactions within the community even when we disagree. > That's motivating. > - I see members within the Openstack community soliciting and offering help > to each other - even between companies who could technically be called > competitors. That's motivating. > - I see the same people who earn a living on selling and supporting > proprietary deployments of Openstack offering their assistance and > perspectives to those who are not using their product and possibly never > will. That's motivating. > The culture developed and nurtured by the Openstack community is nothing > short of admirable and from someone who is socially-driven (despite my > little shell), I have to say that so long as the TC adheres to and advances > this culture, motivation will be easy to find for those who desire to get > engaged. > For those who need a little help, I think the Upstream University is > another place to encourage new contributors and get them motivated through > empowerment via learning/knowledge and the satisfaction of watching their > hard work being used and consumed by countless companies and individuals. > *Topic: Rate of Growth* > *There is no argument the OpenStack technical community has a substantial > rate of growth. What are some of the consequences of this rate?* > I believe Openstack is on the cusp of experiencing growth pains like it > never has before. I don't think we've even touched on what those pains will > look like when we hit some of our long-term adoption goals/milestones. But > pain drives change and change that drives improvement is good. So we can > all tell change is on the horizon. > One of the consequences of rapid growth can be disproportionality between > different areas of the Openstack and its community. Code might get ahead of > docs, the need for process might get ahead of the definition of those > processes and scale requirements might reveal all of those unsightly warts > we've been content to ignore for the last year. > I don't see growth as having consequences per se. Without wanting to sound > cliché, I see Openstack as approaching growth-related challenges that we > need to treat as real opportunities. So long as we focus on the task at > hand and not lose sight of the 'why' not allow overwhelm-ment (is that a > word?) from affecting the measure of correction that may be needed to > resolve a challenge, I think we'll continue to land on our feet from cycle > to cycle. > > *Topic: New Contributor Experience* > *How would you characterize the experience new contributors have currently?* > I mentioned Upstream University earlier and I think it's worth repeating > that working on something that matters is motivating. > I do *not* believe however that maintaining the status quo is ever an > acceptable approach with technical leadership as provided by the TC. > Quirks, 'that is the way we've always done it' and 'get used to it' are > completely unacceptable. We can't discourage change if it helps but we > can't allow unnecessary or poorly-prioritized changes to negatively affect > our progress on the project as whole either. > With that said, I'm pretty sure new contributors that are contributing to > Openstack (more than casually) understand the dynamics around contributing > to a high-volume open source project like Openstack. For those who do not, > the learning curve can be pretty steep but beneficial. And we need to be > careful not to allow the process to suffer for high performers in the name > of inclusiveness. > One of my goals, if elected, will be to facilitate a superior product via > process(es) that enables a scalable contribution pipeline for experienced > developers - coupled with an effective onboarding process for those who are > just getting started with Openstack's development cadence. I think the > priority definitely needs to be where we get our biggest bang since our > resources are obviously not unlimited but I hope that an effective > contributor experience does a good job at accommodating both new and > existing contributors and I hope we aren't afraid to challange the status > quo if we're failing that goal somehow. > *Topic: Communication* > *How would you describe our current state of communication in the OpenStack > community?* > While I think our communication overall is encouraging and moving in a > positive direction as a whole, I think cross-project and communication > between developers and the consumers remains to be a challenge. > Understandable though when you have multiple mailing lists with countless > updates and program owners and contributors who can't possibly read every > message to se if there's something that requires their attention. > IRC and email tends to be our forte but I envision expanding the Operator > Summits to include cross-project summits where brainstorming between 2-3 > programs that compliment each other (i.e, Swift/Sahara, > TripleO/Ironic/Nova) can be *highly* beneficial. I know we already have > mid-cycle meet-ups but this level of collaboration might even benefit from > a dedicated design summit. No sponsors - just a place where ideas dedicated > to the technical direction of Openstack share the spotlight. Just a thought. > > *Topic: Relationship with the Foundation Board* > *The technical committee interacts with the foundation board on several > different fronts. How would you describe these interactions?* > There's a world of difference between project governance and technical > leadership. I admittedly have not sat down with the Foundation members > within a TC context so I couldn't speak to how it works well or not today. > But what I can say is that I've read what the other candidates who have > served on the TC in the poast have shared and my interpretation is that > things seem to be a bit frosty. > But I've run into this before. Regardless, I think a clear definition of > roles and responsibilities would be of value to both the Foundation and the > TC and the relational elements that affect their ability to work together > effectively. I'm looking forward to seeing this interaction firsthand and > making up my own mind. But until then, onward and upward! > > *Foundation:* http://www.openstack.org/community/members/profile/11026 > *IRC:* greenhorn > *Website:* http://www.aqorn.com/about > > Mahalo, > Adam > > *Adam Lawson* > > AQORN, Inc. > 427 North Tatnall Street > Ste. 58461 > Wilmington, Delaware 19801-2230 > Toll-free: (844) 4-AQORN-NOW ext. 101 > International: +1 302-387-4660 > Direct: +1 916-246-2072 > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
