confirmed On 04/01/2014 03:02 PM, John Griffith wrote: > I'd like to announce my candidacy for the Block Storage (Cinder) PTL > position. > > I've been involved with OpenStack for about two and a half years now, > starting out by trying to help with some things in Nova-Volumes and then > with the help of a lot of great folks creating Cinder. I have been the > unofficial and official PTL for Cinder since its beginning, and I've been > pretty passionate about the project, it's goals and it's evolution the > entire time. > > There are a lot of different views about what a PTL "does", some > candidacies point out that it's not technical, others talk about delegation > and management. I think that every project is different, and a lot of the > responsibility comes down to what sort of dedicated team of contributors > you have working on the project. The role of PTL has requirements that are > well defined in item [1]. In addition however I think it's > the responsibility to step in and fill in the gaps if and when needed. > This could be spending late nights debugging issues that slipped in to the > gate and wreak havoc on our process, or picking up the bugs that nobody > else wants to work on. In my opinion the PTL is not only a Project Manager > and an Ambassador, but he or she is also a sort of pinch hitter on the > technical side. > > Cinder has come a long way over the past year, not only the project, but > the team itself. The maturity and growth of the project is visible from > the diverse group of dedicated folks we now have working on the project on > a regular basis. We have greatly increased our number of reviewers as well > as contributors and while it's sometimes challenging we've maintained our > stance on API compatibility and feature implementation requirements for > all drivers. The review and contribution stats(here [2] and here [3]) are > a clear indication that the project is actively growing and the work-load > is becoming more and more evenly distributed. I personally think Cinder is > on the right track and the current direction is the right one to continue > on. > > All of that being said, there are still significant challenges ahead; the > top items I see for the Juno release: > * Maintaining driver compatibility > We've always taken a hard stance on requiring all submitted drivers to meet > a base set of requirements, this is extremely important for end users to > ensure the promise of OpenStack is realized. It's rather difficult to pool > multiple block storage resources into a single virtual resource if some of > them don't implement the expected functionality. > > * Quality and Performance > We've spent a good deal of effort on quality during the Icehouse release, > but I think there's still a lot of work to be done here. In addition I > feel we should be starting to look at things like performance and > scalability of the core project itself. We haven't done a lot of focused > work here in the past, and I think we should. > > We also would benefit greatly from more in-depth testing being added to > Tempest as part of the CI process. In particular we don't have much of the > scenario testing that's been introduced to some of the other projects to do > more stress and large-scale type operations. > > * Processes to test storage backends > This has been somewhat controversial, but it really shouldn't be. Once you > strip away the rhetoric and the strong opinions, at the end of the day I > would just like to see every driver in Cinder undergo and pass the same > tests that every commit runs against the LVMiSCSI driver. It doesn't have > to be "everything" at once, but starting on this and getting data will help > to make Cinder and OpenStack a much stronger and healthier project. > > * Configuration and Management improvements > This is something that has a lot of potential in my opinion. Cinder isn't > the most difficult project to set up and manage, however it does have a > daunting number of options, and ever growing number of choices in > components and many of them aren't well understood. I'd like to see > easier, more clear configuration options, the ability to do things like > "plug and play" driver/backend addition etc. > > * Tighter integration and collaboration with other OpenStack projects > This is a big one in my opinion as the number of projects in OpenStack > continues to grow at an exponential rate. We as the Cinder team should do > a much better job of tying in with other groups, not only the obvious like > Nova, but also Ceilometer, Trove, Savannah and of course Horizon. > > Our logging and exception handling also still needs a good deal of work. > I've spent a lot of time this release inspecting logs and debugging issues > and I'm afraid we don't make things very easy for folks that are actually > deploying OpenStack and trying to use the logs to debug issues. > > I've had a few people approach me and ask if I thought it would be good if > I were to "not" run; in my case I still feel that I have a good deal to > offer and I'd like to continue doing the work. I'm relying more and more > on other contributors in the community which makes a huge difference. > Every project is different, how it's run, how decisions are made etc. In > the case of Cinder, I don't think there's an uneven balance of decision > making or direction planning in Cinder (in other words I think there's > broad inclusion of multiple members); those responsibilities are shared > well across the entire team which in my opinion makes all the difference in > the world. > > In summary, it's been an absolute privilege to serve as PTL for Cinder, I > love the project and truly enjoy the work. I'm hoping that others feel as > though I've done a good job here and would like to see me continue in this > role. I realize that it's more and more common now for folks to step down > as PTL after a couple of releases, it can be a stressful job and it's good > to share the work-load. > > Thanks, > John > > [1]: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/PTLguide > [2]: > http://stackalytics.com/?release=icehouse&metric=commits&project_type=openstack&module=cinder-group&company=&user_id= > [3]: > http://stackalytics.com/?release=icehouse&metric=marks&project_type=openstack&module=cinder-group&company=&user_id= > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
