On 01/28/2015 01:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Monty Taylor wrote: >> You'll notice that I did say in my suggestion that ANYONE should be able >> to propose a name - I believe that would include non-dev people. Since >> the people in question are marketing people, I would imagine that if any >> of them feel strongly about a name, that it should be trivial for them >> to make their case in a persuasive way. > > The proposal as it stands (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/150604/4) > currently excludes all non-ATCs from voting, though. The wider > "community" was included in previous iterations of the naming process, > so this very much feels like a TC power grab. > >> I'm not willing to cede that choosing the name is by definition a >> marketing activity - and in fact the sense that such a position was >> developing is precisely why I think it's time to get this sorted. I >> think the dev community feels quite a bit of ownership on this topic and >> I would like to keep it that way. > > It's not by definition a technical activity either, so we are walking a > thin line. Like I commented on the review: I think the TC can retain > ownership of this process and keep the last bits of fun that were still > in it[1], as long as we find a way to keep non-ATCs in the naming > process, and take into account the problematic names raised by the > marketing community team (which will use those names as much as the > technical community does).
Agree. I actually don't think it's strictly important for the TC to "own" this as much as I don't want the technical folks excluded. What if, to reduce stress on you, we make this 100% mechanical: - Anyone can propose a name - Election officials verify that the name matches the criteria - * note: how do we approve additive exceptions without tons of effort - Marketing team provides feedback to the election officials on names they find image-wise problematic - The poll is created with the roster of all foundation members containing all of the choices, but with the marketing issues clearly labeled, like this: * Love * Lumber * Lettuce * Lemming - marketing issues identified - post poll - foundation staff run trademarks checks on the winners in order until a legally acceptable winner is found This way nobody is excluded, it's not a burden on you, it's about as transparent as it could be - and there are no special privileges needed for anyone to volunteer to be an election official. I'm going to continue to advocate that we use condorcet instead of a launchpad poll because we need the ability to rank things for post-vote trademark checks to not get weird. (also, we're working on getting off of launchpad, so let's not re-add another connection) That said - having a script that the foundation staff can use to generate a condorcet vote from the foundation membership rolls seems like a generally useful thing to have. Since I'm causing trouble, I'd be happy to help write it. > [1] FWIW, it's been a long time since I last considered the naming > process as "fun". It's not been fun for me at all to handle this process > recently and take hits from all sides (I receive more hatemail about > this process than you would think). As we formalize and clarify this > process, I would be glad to transfer the naming process to some > TC-nominated election official. I consider all this "taking back the > naming process" effort as a personal reflection on my inability to > preserve the neutrality of the process. It used to be fun, yes, when I > would throw random names on a whiteboard and get the room to pick. It no > longer is. I think that in and of itself is a good reason to have a better process. Anything we do can get contentious - and anything we do that adds to stress or strain on you should be replaced by something that does not add stress or strain. One of the nice things about a fully mechanical voting process is that there is nobody that should receive hate-mail. __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
