Hello ONAP TSC:

I would like to keep the discussion moving regarding how and when we might
choose to change the method of populating the TSC.

>From the discussions thus far, I do not believe I heard much pushback on
the population method suggested by Chris D. and Stephen T. at last week's
TSC meeting.  In general, it called for a TSC where anyone can
self-nominate to run for a TSC seat, and those that are allowed to vote
must have demonstrated some form of previous participation in the project
including code contributions, wiki contributions, subcommittee
participation/leadership, etc.

If we were to do something like that, the one significant concern is end
user representation, in particular since several of our end users have just
joined the project recently and are ramping up their plans, and developer
capabilities to directly participate in the project.  Mazin has called for
50% end-user participation in the TSC, others have just expressed the
general concern that the end users should still be represented "well" in
the new structure.

We have also heard from several of the TSC members that now is not the
right time to change the makeup of the TSC and we should leave it the same
at least until Casablanca (Nov. 2018).  A vote was held on this with a
significant number of voters indicating that they would like the TSC to
remain the same until Casablanca.  The vote did not pass however because
such a change (which affects the ONAP Charter) must pass with a
super-majority of 2/3s of the votes.

We have agreed to vote on this postponement again to see if it will pass
the super-majority.  However, several TSC members have requested that such
a vote not occur in a vacuum and instead be voted on along side other
proposal(s) to populate the TSC differently than it is done today.

In the spirit of compromise, there are two ways in which we might ensure
end-user representation on the TSC.  One of the ways was suggested by Chris
and Stephen during their presentation last week, whereby:
   In addition to 15 elected TSC members, each end-user Platinum Member of
LFN that had been a part of ONAP and/or LFN for less than 12 months from
the time of the election, would be allowed to appoint a representative to
the TSC.  If we were to put this in place, then Turk Telecom, Verizon, and
Vodafone would be allowed to appoint a TSC representative while China
Mobile, China Telecom, AT&T, Bell Canada, Orange, and Reliance Jio would
not get an appointment because they have been members of ONAP/LFN for more
than 12 months.  If we were to change this appointment time period from 12
months to 24 months, then all current LFN Platinum members who are end
users would be allowed to appoint a representative for this year's TSC
election, and Verizon, Vodafone, and Turk Telecom would be allowed to
appoint a representative in the 2019 TSC election as well.

Another way we could ensure Operator participation in the TSC during our
first 2 years would be to say that we will elect a TSC of 13 or 15 members,
then for all end-user Platinum members who do not otherwise have a
representative (elected) on the TSC, they would be allowed to appoint a
representative.  If we were to elect 13 and then have a potential addition
of the 9 Platinum end users, that would make the TSC size 22.  However, I
am confident that some community members from our heavily engaged end users
will be elected to the TSC as part of the 13 count and as such, there will
be no need for that company to appoint a representative.

Finally, I will reiterate that from my vantage point, there will be
significant benefit from having our developers who are much closer to the
code have TSC leadership positions.  We have a lot of room for improvement
in how we work collectively and collaboratively to produce ONAP and
empowering our leading developers to identify and overcome those issues
will benefit the project substantially.

I would like to facilitate this [re]vote with potential TSC-population
options at the TSC meeting next week (4/19)  If that sounds like a
reasonable target to everyone, then please provide your comments and
suggestions on the proposals I've listed above and/or propose another
alternative method of populating the TSC.  Let's see if we can form up what
will be the best options to vote on via email before the TSC meeting next
week.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

Best,

Phil.

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Christopher Donley (Chris) <
christopher.don...@huawei.com> wrote:

> Alex,
>
> That’s the intention (same with use case, etc.).  We want a way to measure
> it, and have it included under wiki.  People who make presentations are
> uploading their slides or adding wiki pages, which can be measured using
> Bitergia.
>
> Chris
>
> From: "Vul, Alex" <alex....@intel.com>
> Date: Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 7:58 AM
> To: Chris Donley <christopher.don...@huawei.com>, "Haiby, Ranny (Nokia -
> US/San Jose)" <ranny.ha...@nokia.com>, "onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" <
> onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
>
> Subject: RE: TSC Composition Proposal
>
> Chris,
>
>
>
> Given that the TSC is a leadership body, I think that architectural
> subject matter expertise and industry experience should count for a lot as
> well…
>
>
>
> Alex Vul
>
> Intel Corporation
>
>
>
> *From:* onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-bounces@
> lists.onap.org <onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>] *On Behalf Of *Christopher
> Donley (Chris)
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 5, 2018 6:23 AM
> *To:* Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose) <ranny.ha...@nokia.com>;
> onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal
>
>
>
> Ranny,
>
>
>
> First, everyone currently on the TSC would be eligible to run under this
> structure.  Second, we are not just counting code contributions for
> determining voters.  We also propose counting a number of areas where
> operators have been active, such as presenting a use case to the use case
> or security subcommittee, presenting architecture proposals, or working on
> security in the security subcommittee (to name a few). These are captured
> in the contributions to the wiki bullet. The full list is:
>
> -Code contributions/commits
>
> -Code reviews
>
> -Submitting Jira tickets (project management)
>
> -Readthedocs (documentation)
>
> -Subcommittee leadership
>
> -Contributions to the wiki (files or wiki pages)
>
>
>
> Also, since the window for measuring participation hasn’t closed, there is
> still time for other operators to get involved.
>
>
>
> Chris
>
> *From: *"Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose)" <ranny.ha...@nokia.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 2:47 PM
> *To: *Chris Donley <christopher.don...@huawei.com>, "
> onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
> *Subject: *RE: TSC Composition Proposal
>
>
>
> Chris and Steve,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the time and effort put into this proposal.
>
>
>
> One thing I do not see in the proposal is explanation of the “Support
> operators with high interest in ONAP (regardless of development resources
> involved) to be active in the TSC” item from the first slide. Reading the
> next slides it seems that only active contributors will be able to vote, so
> there is no guarantee operators who did not contribute yet will get a seat
> at the TSC. Would you care to elaborate on this please?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Ranny.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:*onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org <onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> *On
> Behalf Of *Christopher Donley (Chris)
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 4, 2018 1:58 PM
> *To:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
> *Subject:* [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal
>
>
>
> Dear TSC,
>
>
>
> Steve Terrill and I have put together a proposal to transition the TSC to
> its “steady state” by June 30, as required in the ONAP Technical Charter.
> We have tried to incorporate feedback from previous TSC discussions on this
> topic, and are proposing a structure that encourages diversity of companies
> and roles, while recognizing contributions in the community and interested
> operators who may have joined later, but who want to take an active role in
> ONAP.  See attached.
>
>
>
> Under our proposal, the TSC will be composed of 15 elected
> representatives, with a cap of no more than two people per company.  Anyone
> who is interested may run for a seat on the TSC.  Voters in the election
> will consist of people who have been active in the community over the
> previous six month period, as demonstrated by one or more of {code
> contributions, code reviews, lira ticket submissions, readthedocs, wiki
> (pages or file uploads), or subcommittee leadership}.
>
>
>
> We are interested in feedback on our proposal (including community
> feedback), and would like to discuss this on tomorrow’s TSC call.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris & Steve
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ONAP-TSC mailing list
> ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
> https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc
>
>


-- 
Phil Robb
VP Operations - Networking & Orchestration, The Linux Foundation
(O) 970-229-5949
(M) 970-420-4292
Skype: Phil.Robb
_______________________________________________
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Reply via email to