Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Matt Riedemann wrote: >> [...] >> Here is mine: it would fail to take into account that preparation for a >> development cycle starts a few months /before/ PTG, not a just few weeks >> before. > > Do we really expect the next cycle PTL to be planning for the next cycle > midway through the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/09/16 03:50 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > > Do we really expect the next cycle PTL to be planning for the next cycle > midway through the current cycle? That seems pretty extreme to me, when > we're still crunching to the 3rd milestone and trying to wrap things up > for feature freeze, which

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/9/2016 6:49 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Rob Cresswell wrote: I've been toying with send this email for a while, but here goes: this all feels like overcomplication and changing of a system that doesn't really need to change. Except the proposal here is actually to not change anything, but

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/9/2016 3:42 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: That doesn't prevent you from doing it Nova-style and use the PTL as the release steward. It just lets you use someone else if you want to. A bit like keeping a headphone jack. Options. What's preventing any projects from delegating release duties

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/9/16 4:42 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > John Griffith wrote: >> ​I think Sean Dague made some really good points and I'd tend to lean >> that way. Honestly charters, bylaws, governance etc shift or are >> rewritten fairly often. Why not just change when we do elections to >> correspond with

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 2016-09-09 06:35:10 -0600 (-0600), John Griffith wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Thierry Carrez > wrote: [...] > > That doesn't prevent you from doing it Nova-style and use the PTL as the > > release steward. It just lets you use someone else if you want to. A

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/9/16 11:32 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Thierry Carrez wrote: >> [...] >> One interesting side-effect is that since the timing of the election >> period (for PTL and TC positions) is defined in the TC charter[3] >> relative to the *Summit*, it means that (unless we change this) we'll >> now

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Thierry Carrez wrote: > [...] > One interesting side-effect is that since the timing of the election > period (for PTL and TC positions) is defined in the TC charter[3] > relative to the *Summit*, it means that (unless we change this) we'll > now run elections to renew PTL and TC positions in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

> -Original Message- > From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:fla...@redhat.com] > Sent: September-09-16 8:19 AM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & > "Release stewa

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Thierry Carrez wrote: Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: [...] I slightly disagree with enforcing another formal role to all teams. I feel that we have enough of them (release liaison for one) to cover for release cross-project work, and projects are free to set their teams with

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > [...] > I slightly disagree with enforcing another formal role to all teams. I > feel that we have enough of them (release liaison for one) to cover for > release cross-project work, and projects are free to set their teams > with more roles if needed. You should probably

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > John Griffith wrote: > > ​I think Sean Dague made some really good points and I'd tend to lean > > that way. Honestly charters, bylaws, governance etc shift or are > > rewritten fairly often. Why not just change

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 08/09/16 16:48 -0600, Doug Wiegley wrote: On Sep 8, 2016, at 12:49 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: On 9/8/2016 6:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 09/08/2016 05:00 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Sean Dague wrote: So... the difference between your proposal and mine is: you

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Thierry Carrez wrote: Rob Cresswell wrote: I've been toying with send this email for a while, but here goes: this all feels like overcomplication and changing of a system that doesn't really need to change. Except the proposal here is actually to not change anything,

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 08/09/16 18:41 +, Hongbin Lu wrote: -Original Message- From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org] Sent: September-08-16 5:00 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards&quo

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

This makes sense to me. I think I'm having a slow day and wasn't connecting the dots. Having the next PTL come in and immediately hear feedback and begin planning how to address it, rather than coming in shortly before the planning event without a feedback loop, sounds like a good move. +1

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Rob Cresswell wrote: > I've been toying with send this email for a while, but here goes: this > all feels like overcomplication and changing of a system that doesn't > really need to change. Except the proposal here is actually to not change anything, but I see what you mean. > I've read the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

I've been toying with send this email for a while, but here goes: this all feels like overcomplication and changing of a system that doesn't really need to change. I've read the pros and cons, and I still can't really see a convincing reason not to move the PTL election to just-before-PTG, so

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Sean Dague wrote: > [...] > I'm also not very concerned about delayed authority of the PTL. Peaceful > handoff should be a pretty basic tenant in projects. Knowing about it > for a longer time shouldn't be a big deal. If it causes giant strife to > pass the torch from one PTL to the next there is

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

John Griffith wrote: > ​I think Sean Dague made some really good points and I'd tend to lean > that way. Honestly charters, bylaws, governance etc shift or are > rewritten fairly often. Why not just change when we do elections to > correspond with releases and keep the continuity that we have

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 08/09/16 04:46, Matt Riedemann wrote: > On 9/7/2016 11:33 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: >> >> I like this. As someone that has been PTL for multiple cycles, it is >> incredibly stressful trying to finish the release, start planning for the >> next one, manage summit planning, etc. I'd love to have

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 07/09/16 12:04 PM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/07/2016 11:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the >> Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the >> middle of the next development

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

> On Sep 8, 2016, at 12:49 PM, Matt Riedemann > wrote: > > On 9/8/2016 6:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 09/08/2016 05:00 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> Sean Dague wrote: >> >>> So... the difference between your proposal and mine is: you force the >>> PTL to be the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Excerpts from John Griffith's message of 2016-09-08 14:13:14 -0600: > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Matt Riedemann > wrote: > > > On 9/8/2016 6:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > > > >> On 09/08/2016 05:00 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > >> > >>> Sean Dague wrote: > >>> > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/8/16 7:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/08/2016 05:00 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Sean Dague wrote: > >> So... the difference between your proposal and mine is: you force the >> PTL to be the release steward (rather than having a choice there), and >> introduce a delay between election

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Good comment and I have an answer inline. On 9/8/16 2:41 PM, Hongbin Lu wrote: > >> -Original Message- >> From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org] >> Sent: September-08-16 5:00 AM >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org >> Subject: Re

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Matt Riedemann wrote: > On 9/8/2016 6:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote: > >> On 09/08/2016 05:00 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> >>> Sean Dague wrote: >>> >> >> >>> So... the difference between your proposal and mine is: you force the >>> PTL to

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/8/2016 6:42 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 09/08/2016 05:00 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Sean Dague wrote: So... the difference between your proposal and mine is: you force the PTL to be the release steward (rather than having a choice there), and introduce a delay between election and start of

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

> -Original Message- > From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org] > Sent: September-08-16 5:00 AM > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & > "Release stewards" > > Sean D

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Mailing List (not for usage questions) <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Date: September 7, 2016 at 10:58:52 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" On 09/

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 07/09/16 17:43 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the middle of the next development cycle. You can find more info on the rationale for that at

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/08/2016 05:00 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Sean Dague wrote: > So... the difference between your proposal and mine is: you force the > PTL to be the release steward (rather than having a choice there), and > introduce a delay between election and start of authority for the PTL. > > I don't

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/07/2016 12:27 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >> Barrett, Carol L wrote: >>> From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] I think another option would be to run the PTL election early, but just don't have the turn over happen until the master release opens up. The

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

> -Original Message- > From: Sean McGinnis [mailto:sean.mcgin...@gmx.com] > Sent: September-07-16 3:17 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & > "Release st

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 01:07:22PM -0400, Sean Dague wrote: > On 09/07/2016 12:27 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Barrett, Carol L wrote: > >> From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] > >>> I think another option would be to run the PTL election early, but just > >>> don't have the turn over

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-09-07 18:24:46 +0200: > Davanum Srinivas wrote: > > Doug, Thierry, > > > > Do we want the stewards to serve as the CPL for Release team as well? > > Yes, they probably would be an evolution of the current release > liaisons. Like I said in the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 9/7/2016 11:33 AM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote: I like this. As someone that has been PTL for multiple cycles, it is incredibly stressful trying to finish the release, start planning for the next one, manage summit planning, etc. I'd love to have someone designated to manage the release-specific

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

or usage questions) <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" On 16-09-07 01:59 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: -Original Message- From: Anita Kuno Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

penstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" On 09/07/2016 10:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi everyone, As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the Summ

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

penstack.org> Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" > On 16-09-07 01:59 PM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Anita Kuno > > Reply: OpenStack Development Mailing L

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

penstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" On 16-09-07 12:43 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: Now, the main drawback of holding elections in the middle of a development cycle is

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

g> Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" > On 16-09-07 12:43 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote: > >>>> Now, the main drawback of holding elections in the middle of a > >>>> development cycle is that

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 2016-09-07 16:20:49 + (+), Barrett, Carol L wrote: [...] > Why not have a PTL own the release from start to finish, with the > PTL for the next release getting elected as above. [...] An overwhelming majority (87%) of our official project teams' deliverables do not follow a synchronous

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

age- > From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org] > Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 11:44 AM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release > stewards"

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/07/2016 12:27 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Barrett, Carol L wrote: >> From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] >>> I think another option would be to run the PTL election early, but just >>> don't have the turn over happen until the master release opens up. The >>> current transition

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:35 AM, Ian Cordasco wrote: > One question, should "Release Stewards" also be members of the Stable Team > for that project or will they become members of the Stable Team? It seems > like there should be a relationship there to me (although maybe

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

(not for usage questions) >> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> Date: September 7, 2016 at 10:58:52 >> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections &

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

t;openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Date: September 7, 2016 at 10:58:52 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" On 09/07/2016 10:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: Hi

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

; > Date: September 7, 2016 at 10:58:52 > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release > stewards" > >> On 09/07/2016 10:43 AM, Thierry Ca

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

ck.org> Subject:  Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" > On 09/07/2016 10:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > > Summit wi

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the > middle of the next development cycle. You can find

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 16-09-07 12:20 PM, Barrett, Carol L wrote: -Original Message- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 9:05 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards&q

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Barrett, Carol L wrote: > From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] >> I think another option would be to run the PTL election early, but just >> don't have the turn over happen until the master release opens up. The >> current transition period is > > > >> actually quite short as noted by the

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Davanum Srinivas wrote: > Doug, Thierry, > > Do we want the stewards to serve as the CPL for Release team as well? Yes, they probably would be an evolution of the current release liaisons. Like I said in the email, "a sort of per-cycle release liaison on steroids". -- Thierry Carrez (ttx)

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

-Original Message- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 9:05 AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards" On 09/07/2016 11:43 AM, Thierry Carr

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/07/2016 11:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the > middle of the next development cycle. You can find more info on the > rationale

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Doug, Thierry, Do we want the stewards to serve as the CPL for Release team as well? -- Dims [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/CrossProjectLiaisons#Release_management On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

On 09/07/2016 10:43 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Hi everyone, > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the > middle of the next development cycle. You can find more info on the > rationale

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-09-07 17:43:59 +0200: > Hi everyone, > > As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the > Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the > middle of the next development cycle. You can find more

[openstack-dev] [all] Timeframe for future elections & "Release stewards"

Hi everyone, As you probably know by now, starting with the Boston event in 2017, the Summit will happen further away from the release day and more around the middle of the next development cycle. You can find more info on the rationale for that at [1] and [2] if interested, this is not the topic