On 03/01/2014 06:30 PM, John Griffith wrote: > Hey, > > I just wanted to send out a quick note on a topic that came up recently. > Unfortunately the folks that I'd like to read this most; don't > participate on the ML typically, but I'd at least like to raise some > community awareness. > > We all know OpenStack is growing at a rapid pace and has a lot of > promise, so much so that there's an enormous field of vendors and OS > distributions that are focusing a lot of effort and marketing on the > project. > > Something that came up recently in the Cinder project is that one of the > backend device vendors wasn't happy with a feature that somebody was > working on and contributed a patch for. Instead of providing a > meaningful review and suggesting alternatives to the patch they set up > meetings with other vendors leaving the active members of the community > out and picked things apart in their own format out of the public view. > Nobody from the core Cinder team was involved in these discussions or > meetings (at least that I've been made aware of). > > I don't want to go into detail about who, what, where etc at this point. > I instead, I want to point out that in my opinion this is no way to > operate in an Open Source community. Collaboration is one thing, but > ambushing other peoples work is entirely unacceptable in my opinion. > OpenStack provides a plethora of ways to participate and voice your > opinion, whether it be this mailing list, the IRC channels which are > monitored daily and also host a published weekly meeting for most > projects. Of course when in doubt you're welcome to send me an email at > any time with questions or concerns that you have about a patch. In any > case however the proper way to address concerns about a submitted patch > is to provide a review for that patch.
Honestly, while I realize you don't want to name names, I actually want
to know about bad actors in our community. Because I think that if bad
actors aren't exposed, then they tend to keep up the bad behavior.
Social pressure is important here.
> Everybody has a voice and the ability to participate, and the most
> effective way to do that is by thorough, timely and constructive code
> reviews.
>
> I'd also like to point out that while a number of companies and vendors
> have fancy taglines like "The Leaders of OpenStack", they're not.
> OpenStack is a community effort, as of right now there is no company
> that leads or runs OpenStack. If you have issues or concerns on the
> development side you need to take those up with the development
> community, not vendor xyz.
+1
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
Samsung Research America
s...@dague.net / sean.da...@samsung.com
http://dague.net
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
