I think that this will be my last say on this matter, because it seems
to be getting out of hand.
Us vs. them.
Dev vs. Ops.
It could be perceived that I am trying to wage a 'war' on the OpenStack
development process, on the Developers, but that is not the case.
But I do think there are valid points from both sides that need to be
addressed. There are two sides of this story and in the end I do think
that OpenStack as a community does need to accommodate and cater to the
needs of of the colors of the rainbow.
I hope that this discussion does open some doors, opens some minds and
creates acceptance for those who are not like us.
Believe me I have been dealing with this all my life.
I would like to thank you all for your contribution and thoughts in this
thread, I hope it was useful for you all as it was for me.
--
Best Regards,
Maish Saidel-Keesing
On 05/04/15 20:11, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Maish Saidel-Keesing's message of 2015-05-04 17:46:21 +0300:
On 05/04/15 17:07, Anita Kuno wrote:
I'd like to go back to the beginning to clarify something.
On 04/29/2015 02:34 PM, Adam Lawson wrote:
So I started replying to Doug's email in a different thread but didn't want
to hi-jack that so I figured I'd present my question as a more general
question about how voting is handled for the TC.
Anyway, I find it curious that the TC is elected by those within the
developer community but TC candidates talk about representing the operator
community
In my statements I talked about acknowledging the operator community not
representing them. When I speak, I represent myself and my best
understanding of a certain situation, if others find value in the
position I hold, they will let me know.
In my view of what comprises OpenStack, the TC is one point of a
triangle and the operators are an entirely different point. Trying to
get two points of a triangle to be the same thing compromises the
integrity of the structure. Each needs to play its part, not try to be
something it is not.
A three point triangle. I like the idea! Anita I assume that you are
talking about the TC[3], the board [1] and the user committee [2].
I honestly do not see this at the moment as an equally weighted triangle.
Should they be? Perhaps not, maybe yes.
It could be that my view of things is skew, but here it is.
The way to get something into OpenStack is through code.
Who submits the code? Developers.
Who approves code? Reviewers and core
On top of that you have the PTL
Above the PTL - you have the TC. They decide what is added into
OpenStack and (are supposed) drive overall direction.
These are the people that have actionable influence into what goes into
the products.
AFAIK neither the Foundation - nor the User committee have any
actionable influence into what goes into the products, what items are
prioritized and what is dropped.
If each of the three point of the triangle had proper (actionable)
influence and (actionable) say in what goes on and happens within the
OpenStack then that would be ideal. Does the representation have to be
equal? I don't think so. But it should be there somehow.
One of the points of the User Committee mission is:
"Consolidate user requirements and present these to the management board
and technical committee"
There is no mention that I could find on any of the other missions[3][1]
that says that the TC or the board have to do anything with user
requirements presented to them.
I do not know if this has ever been addressed before, but it should be
defined. A process with where the TC and collects requirements from the
User Committee or Board and with a defined process this trickles down
into the teams and projects.
You're describing these relationships in a much more hierarchical manner
than I think reflects their reality.
Decisions about the future of OpenStack are made by the people who
show up and contribute. We try to identify common goals and
priorities, and where there's little overlap we support each other
in ways that we perceive improve the project. That process uses
input from many sources, including product managers from contributing
companies and operator/user feedback. As Thierry pointed out, there's
no community group dictating what anyone works on or what the
priorities are.
Again, I'm curious about the specific issues driving this discussion.
Are there bugs or blueprints that you feel need more attention?
Doug
__________________________________________________________________________
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
__________________________________________________________________________
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
