I like the solutions that Will and Animesh are giving. We should incorporate them in our work. I want to stress however that we need to start working in a way that others, committers and non-committers can copy. One thing I am thinking of is that we create a gate through which commits *can* go if you so wish. In this way people can see that it works before adopting. Let's not go for consensus but let's create it on the way.
having said so, I propose to set a date for our first (irc/goto) meeting; wednesday 10 december 16:00 UTC? On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> wrote: > I am speaking as a committer who has limited insight into the 'correct' way > to do this via Apache (so be gentle). :) > > I like the idea of a wiki page to help get everyone on the same page and to > track the consensus as we move forward... > > I also agree that it is hard to come to a consensus on the list because it > is really hard to have a constructive conversation on here in a timely > manner where the different voices can be heard. > > I think it would be interesting to schedule sessions/meetings on the list > so any interested party can join. These sessions/meetings would happen in > a format like IRC where the transcript of the session can be later posted > to the list as well as a summary of the transcript so it can be reviewed by > any member who could not make the meeting. This way we keep all of the > actual conversation in the list, but we also make it easier to actually > have a 'conversation' at the same time. It is hard to beat real time when > working through this sort of stuff. > > Does this make sense to others? Thoughts? > > Will > > > *Will STEVENS* > Lead Developer > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 > w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi < > animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> Wearing my PMC hat and with past experience on these discussions we have >> not made much progress on mailing list despite agreeing on the goals and >> have locked horns. One possibility after reading Chip's email and concerns >> I see is that, we create a wiki outlining the problem space, possible >> solution(s) and their specific pros and cons and have people collaborate. >> Once a general consensus is there and wiki is stable we can bring it back >> to the mailing list for final approval. This is open as well as requires >> participant a higher degree of commitment to collaborate and will be more >> structured. >> >> Thanks >> Animesh >> >> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Chip Childers <chipchild...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> > > Steve, >> > > >> > > (Speaking with my PMC hat on, but not as someone that has the time to >> > > help with this process) >> > > >> > > I love the idea of moving forward with resolving some of the quality >> > > process / tooling / etc... challenges that we face as a project and >> > > community. I also love the idea that companies getting commercial >> > > value from this project are talking (as companies) about how to best >> > > support the project through either directing their employees to work >> > > on this problem, allowing those interested the time to do so, and / or >> > > offering (as Citrix did) required hardware/software resources to make >> > > improvements for the common good. Importantly, I like that the >> > > companies involved are mutually agreeing that this is for the common >> > > good. >> > > >> > > That said, I have a concern about the outline below, specifically in >> > > how the definition of approach and eventual execution are handled. >> > > The proposal of taking this off-list until there is a "proposal to >> ratify" >> > > is what I'd like to see changed. I would fully expect that a fleshed >> > > out proposal hitting the list would be met with more discussion than >> > > you would like (and perhaps even met with frustration). >> > > >> > > What has worked well for us in the past, where there is a need to have >> > > those interested in "doing work" to be able to focus on that work, has >> > > been to start with a call for interested parties (as you did). Then, >> > > using a combination of threads on this list and "live" meetings, make >> > > progress on defining the requirements and approach incrementally. >> > > Execution of any work should similarly be open and shared on this list. >> > > Throughout that process, allowing comments and openings for >> > > participants are critical. >> > > >> > > One of the things we learned about using "live" meetings to speed up >> > > the consensus process in the past is to make sure that while they are >> > > fantastic at allowing the participants to understand each other, it's >> > > critical to remember that (1) there are no project decisions made >> > > outside of the mailing lists and (2) that it's important to have >> > > minutes or notes from those live meetings shared with the community as >> a >> > whole. >> > > >> > > Now a very real concern that some of us have is getting bogged down in >> > > arguments based on opinion, especially the "drive by" opinions. This >> > > issue (plus challenges with people violently agreeing with each other, >> > > yet talking past each other), is what I believe has held up meaningful >> > > progress. To deal with this, I suggest we all remember that projects >> > > at the ASF are about supporting those that "DO", while giving >> > > opportunity for participation and comment from those that might not >> > > currently be "DOING". But those that are doing the work, and >> > > collaborating to reach a shared goal, shouldn't let a lack of 100% >> > > consensus on every aspect hold back progress. >> > > >> > > As someone who will not be "doing" anything for this effort, but has >> > > an interest in maintaining this community's health and seeing it >> > > continue to succeed, I hope my suggestions and comments are helpful. >> > > >> > > -chip >> > > >> > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 07:12:27PM +0000, Steve Wilson wrote: >> > >> Hi Everyone, >> > >> >> > >> It was great to get to see a number of you at the recent CCC in >> Budapest. >> > While I was there, I got to meet face to face with individuals working >> for several >> > companies that have a real stake in the commercial success of the >> CloudStack >> > project. >> > >> >> > >> After joining Citrix (and becoming involved in CloudStack) about a >> year ago, >> > I’ve come to believe that we need to do more to mature our quality >> practices >> > around this codebase. We all like to say #cloudstackworks (and it’s >> true), but >> > this is a massive codebase that’s used in the most demanding >> situations. We >> > have large telecommunications companies and enterprises who are betting >> their >> > businesses on this software. It has to be great! >> > >> >> > >> There has been quite a bit of discussion on the mailing list in >> recent months >> > about how we improve in this area. There is plenty of passion, but we >> haven’t >> > made enough concrete progress as a community. In my discussions with key >> > contributors as CCC, there was general agreement that the DEV list isn’t >> a good >> > forum for hashing out these kinds of things. Email is too low-bandwidth >> and too >> > impersonal. >> > >> >> > >> At CCC, I discussed with several people the idea that we commission a >> small >> > sub team to go hash out a proposal for how we handle the following topics >> > within the ACS community (which can then be brought back to the larger >> > community for ratification): >> > >> >> > >> * Continuous integration and test automation >> > >> * Gating of commits >> > >> * Overall commit workflow >> > >> >> > >> We are looking for volunteers to commit to being part of this team. >> This >> > would imply a serious commitment. We don’t want hangers on or observers. >> > This will entail real work and late night meetings. We’re looking for >> people who >> > are serious contributors to the codebase. >> > >> >> > >> From Citrix, David Nalley and Animesh Chaturvedi have booth told me >> they’re >> > willing to commit to this project. They’ve both managed ACS releases >> and have >> > a really good view into the current process — and I know both are >> passionate >> > about improving our process. From my CCC discussions, I believe there >> are >> > individuals from Schuberg Philis, Shape Blue and Cloud Ops who are >> willing to >> > commit to this process. >> > >> >> > >> If you are willing to be part of this team to drive forward our >> community, >> > please reply here. >> > >> >> > >> Thanks, >> > >> >> > >> -Steve >> > >> >> > >> Steve Wilson >> > >> VP & Product Unit Manager >> > >> Cloud Software >> > >> Citrix >> > >> @virtualsteve >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Daan >> -- Daan
