Zane Bitter wrote: > On 22/08/14 12:45, Dolph Mathews wrote: >>> >I'm all for getting a final decision, but a 'final' decision that >>> has been >>> >imposed from outside rather than internalised by the participants is... >>> >rarely final. >>> > >> The expectation of a PTL isn't to stomp around and make "final" >> decisions, >> it's to step in when necessary and help both sides find the best >> solution. >> To moderate. > > Oh sure, but that's not just the PTL's job. That's everyone's job. Don't > you think? > > I did that before I was the PTL and will continue to do it after I'm no > longer the PTL. And if anyone in the (especially) the core or wider Heat > team sees an opportunity to step in and moderate a disagreement I > certainly expect them to take it and not wait for me to step in. > > I'm not calling for no leadership here - I'm calling for leadership from > _everyone_, not just from one person who holds a particular role.
I guess the difference between you and me is that I don't see having a PTL as preventing that moderation and leadership from everyone. I really see it as a safety valve in case things ever go badly wrong. I prefer that safety valve to be built into the project leadership, rather than at the TC level. Could you explain how having a PTL is preventing that "leadership from everyone" ? Did it prevent it in Heat ? Did having the PTL safety valve hurt you ? I'm open to the alternative solution (which would be for programs which are not interested in having a PTL to just not have one). But then if things go badly wrong, you require the TC to step in with threats of removal of OpenStack and/or to force an election/vote in the middle of the crisis. I'm really failing to see how that would result, in those hypothetical crisis scenarios, in a better outcome. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev