+1 On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Matt Jarvis <matt.jar...@datacentred.co.uk> wrote:
> +1 > > On 4 March 2016 at 17:21, Robert Starmer <rob...@kumul.us> wrote: > >> If fixing a typo in a document is considered a technical contribution, >> then I think we've already cast the net far and wide. ATC as used has >> become a name implying you're trying to make OpenStack better, more >> useable, and more functional for those who would use/deploy (and fix, >> update, enhance) it. And somehow that's been connected to touching the >> codebase directly. This implies that an architectural discussion that >> changes OpenStack, but doesn't initiate a code change is not an ATC worthy >> event. >> >> So let's fix this, and if a proposal is needed how about: >> >> Active Technical Contributions are those that improve OpenStack either >> directly by impacting the code base, or indirectly by making OpenStack >> useable. >> >> Robert >> >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Jonathan Proulx <j...@csail.mit.edu> >> wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 12:20:44PM +0000, Jeremy Stanley wrote: >>> :On 2016-03-04 10:02:36 +0100 (+0100), Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> :[...] >>> :> Upstream contributors are represented by the Technical Committee >>> :> and vote for it. Downstream contributors are represented by the >>> :> User Committee and (imho) should vote for it. >>> :[...] >>> : >>> :Right, this brings up the other important point I meant to make. The >>> :purpose of the "ATC" designation is to figure out who gets to vote >>> :for the Technical Committee, as a form of self-governance. That's >>> :all, but it's very important (in my opinion, far, far, far more >>> :important than some look-at-me status on a conference badge or a >>> :hand-out on free admission to an event). Granting votes for the >>> :upstream technical governing body to people who aren't involved >>> :directly in upstream technology decisions makes little sense, or at >>> :least causes it to cease being self-governance (as much as letting >>> :all of OpenStack's software developers decide who should run the >>> :User Committee would make it no longer well represent downstream >>> :users). >>> >>> At the risk of drifting off topic that concern "letting all of >>> OpenStack's software developers decide who should run the User >>> Committee (UC)" is largely why the UC hasn't expanded to include >>> elected positions. >>> >>> As currently written bylaws define the UC as 3 appointed positions. ! >>> appointed by TC one by the board and the third by thte other two (FYI >>> I'm currently sitting in the TC apointed seat). The by laws further >>> allow the UC to add seats elected by all foundation members. In >>> Tokyo summit sessions where expantion was discussed the consensus was >>> to encourage more volunteer participation but not to add more formal >>> seats because there was no way to properly define the voting >>> constituency. Personally I can see both sides of that argument, but >>> the sense of the room was not to add elected positions untill we can >>> better deifne the constituency (that discussion could be reopened but >>> if you'd like to do so please start a new thread) >>> >>> Perhaps nailing down this definition for recognition can actually have >>> broader implications and help to define who elects the UC. It would >>> take a by-law change of course, but atleast we'd actually have a good >>> proposal (which we currently don't). >>> >>> -Jon >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenStack-operators mailing list >>> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-operators mailing list >> OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators >> >> > > DataCentred Limited registered in England and Wales no. 05611763 > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-operators mailing list > OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
