> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Dickinson [mailto:m...@not.mn]
> Sent: 23 August 2014 03:20
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [ptls] The Czar system, or how to scale 
> PTLs
> I think Anne makes some excellent points about the pattern being proposed
> being unlikely to be commonly implemented across all the programs (or, at 
> best,
> very difficult). Let's not try to formalize another "best practice" that 
> works many
> times and force it to work every time. Here's an alternate proposal:
> Let's let PTLs be PTLs and effectively coordinate and manage the activity in 
> their
> respective projects. And let's get the PTLs together for one or two days every
> cycle to discuss project issues. Just PTLs, and let's focus on the project
> management stuff and some cross-project issues.
> Getting the PTLs together would allow them to discuss cross-project issues,
> share frustrations and solutions about what does and doesn't work. Basically,
> think of it as a mid-cycle meetup, but for PTLs. (Perhaps we could even ask 
> the
> Foundation to sponsor it.)
> --John

As part of the user feedback loop, we've found the PTL role extremely useful to 
channel feedback.  The operator PTL discussions during the Atlanta summit 
helped to clarify a number of areas where the PTL can then take the points back 
to the design summit. It is not clear how czars would address the outward 
facing part of the PTL role which is clearly needed in view of the various 
discussions around program management and priorities.

If we have lots of czars or major differences in how each project is 
structured, it is not clear how we channel user feedback to the project teams. 
Would there be a user czar on each project ?

I have no problem with lots of czars to delegate activities across the projects 
but having a single accountable and elected PTL who can choose the level of 
delegation (and be assessed on that) seems to be a very good feature.


OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to