I’ll see what I can dust off in prep for next call. I will be Shanghai next week, but should be able to make it— just an issue of cost in case VOIP fails.
Cheers, Ash > On Sep 22, 2016, at 1:43 PM, Christopher Price <[email protected]> wrote: > > Please refrain from keeping your mouth shut. > > It is a good topic to bring back to life, we have discussed the lifecycle > process on TSC calls over the last weeks (when not addressing Colorado) and > have an intention to look further into improvements and development during > the Danube release. Now is the right time to raise topics and it may even be > worth spinning out an action point or two to find focus areas and activities > to work on. (Let’s see if we have time on Tuesday to add it to the agenda) > > Two top of mind topics in this area: > · We have an open item to discuss branching and developer support on > the tech discuss calls. > · We have an activity to provide useful project metrics for the > community from our dashboards. > · An ongoing thread and committed activities to help track upstream, > contributions. > > / Chris > > From: <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Ash > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Date: Thursday 22 September 2016 at 22:19 > To: Daniel Smith <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Cc: TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Follow up on Upstreaming Questions > > Once upon a time, we had a process Lifecycle process for taking care of this, > but ya'll TSC folks vetoed me. And instead, we put something in place that > proved to be simpler, but not as useful as we had apparently hoped. > > I could always dust off that prior work, if there's any interest. We had > collaborative input on it. > > Sorry for jumping in on your TSC thread. I'll go back to keeping my mouth > shut. > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Daniel Smith <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> Hello TSC Membrs >> >> Several weeks ago as part of the inclusion of Requirements Projects, I >> asked how we know that people are looking at what we are producing in >> Requirements projects and how we (OPNFV) ensure that deliverables from >> Requirements projects are being reviewed and taken into account upstream >> (from an OPNFV overall standpoint). >> >> Would any of you be able to shed some light on this? The current impression >> that I have is we have the docs that sit in a repo and that’s it. >> >> Thank you >> >> >> >> <image001.png> <http://www.ericsson.com/> >> >> Daniel Smith >> Sr. System Designer >> Ericsson Inc. >> 8400 Decarie Blvd. Montreal, PQ >> (514)-594-2799 <tel:%28514%29-594-2799> >> >> <image002.png> <http://www.ericsson.com/current_campaign> >> >> Legal entity: Ericsson AB, registered office in Stockholm. This >> Communication is Confidential. We only send and receive email on the basis >> of the terms set out at www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer >> <http://www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss >> <https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss> > > _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing > list [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > <https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss><image001.png><image002.png>
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
