> >> Divert all cross project efforts from the following projects so we can > >> focus > >> our cross project resources. Once we are in a bitter place we can expand > >> our > >> cross project resources to cover these again. This doesn't mean removing > >> anything. > >> * Sahara > >> * Trove > >> * Tripleo > > > > You write as if cross-project efforts are both of fixed size and > > amenable to centralized command & control. > > > > Neither of which is actually the case, IMO. > > > > Additional cross-project resources can be ponied up by the large > > contributor companies, and existing cross-project resources are not > > necessarily divertable on command. > > What “cross-project efforts” are we talking about? The liaison program in > Oslo has been a qualified success so far. Would it make sense to extend that > to other programs and say that each project needs at least one designated > QA, Infra, Doc, etc. contact?
Well my working assumption was that we were talking about people with the appropriate domain knowledge who are focused primarily on standing up the QA infrastructure. (as opposed to designated points-of-contact within the individual project teams who would be the first port of call for the QA/infra/doc folks if they needed a project-specific perspective on some live issue) That said however, I agree that it would be useful for the QA/infra/doc teams to know who in each project is most domain-knowledgeable when they need to reach out about a project-specific issue. Cheers, Eoghan _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackemail@example.com http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev