On 10/07/2014 02:50 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > On Oct 7, 2014, at 7:55 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Signed PGP part >> On 06/10/14 17:56, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> The Oslo team is responsible for managing code shared between >>> projects. There are a LOT more projects than Oslo team members, so >>> we created the liaison program at the beginning of the Juno cycle, >>> asking each team that uses Oslo libraries to provide one volunteer >>> liaison. Our liaisons facilitate communication and work with us to >>> make the application code changes needed as code moves out of the >>> incubator and into libraries. With this extra help in place, we >>> were able to successfully graduate 7 new libraries and begin having >>> them adopted across OpenStack. >>> >>> With the change-over to the new release cycle, it’s time to ask for >>> volunteers to sign up to be liaisons again. If you are interested >>> in acting as a liaison for your project, please sign up on the wiki >>> page [1]. It would be very helpful to have a full roster before the >>> summit, so we can make sure liaisons are invited to participate in >>> any relevant discussions there. >>> >>> Thanks, Doug >>> >>> [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Oslo/ProjectLiaisons >> >> Quoting the page: "The liaison should be a core reviewer for the >> project." Is it a reasonable limitation? I suspect that being an Oslo >> liaison usually does not really require the core status. Any team >> member with visible level of participation in the project and decent >> communication skills should be able to do the job. >> >> Why I ask: I would probably consider signing up for the liaison >> program from Neutron side if 1) the program rules would not be that >> tight; and 2) current Neutron Oslo liaison (Salvatore?) wouldn't be >> against it. > > We need someone who can push patches into the project and understands the > code well enough to be able to do that without delay. Usually that means a > core reviewer. If the Neutron team commits to working closely with you on > patches to avoid delays, that would achieve the same ends. >
Agreed with Doug. It's not really a strong requirement. The request of the liaison to be a core reviewer is more a suggestion for the projects themselves in order to make the interaction between both teams easier. That said, we could probably re-word that somehow to reflect the above. Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
