On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 7:26 AM, Everett Toews <everett.to...@rackspace.com> wrote:
> On Nov 14, 2014, at 1:43 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 11/14/2014 05:13 PM, Everett Toews wrote: > >> The liaison should be a core reviewer for the project, but does not > >> need to be the PTL. By default, the liaison will be the PTL. > > > > ]Anyway, the outcome of the email exchange with Eoghan was that I > recommended he submit a core for the API liaison to start, and that I would > raise the issue on the ML to see if those conditions may be loosened to > include non-cores. And... here is that issue being raised :) > > I’m totally fine with that. Ideally it’s the person who is the most > passionate about the API from the team, regardless of core status. > > The current wording on the Cross-Project Liaisons page is > > "The liaison should be a core reviewer for the project, but does not need > to be the PTL.” > > I think the key word there is _should_. Naturally, it’s preferable to want > a core reviewer in this role because they have more say about what gets > into the code base but it’s not an absolute must. > > We can loosen the wording further but I think it’s okay to proceed with a > non-core reviewer, especially if that person is passionate about APIs. > > My 2c is we should say "The liason should be the PTL or whomever they delegate to be their representative" and not mention anything about the person needing to be a core developer. It removes any ambiguity about who ultimately decides who the liason is (the PTL) without saying that they have to do the work themselves. Regards, Chris > Everett > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
