On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 8:33 AM, Johannes Erdfelt <johan...@erdfelt.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 08, 2014, Michael Still <mi...@stillhq.com> wrote:
>> There are other things happening behind the scenes as well -- we have
>> a veto process for current cores when we propose a new core. It has
>> been made clear to me that several current core members believe we
>> have reached "the maximum effective size" for core, and that they will
>> therefore veto new additions. Therefore, we need to make room in core
>> for people who are able to keep up with our review workload.
>
> I've heard this before, but I've never understood this.
>
> Can you (or someone else) elaborate on why they believe that there is an
> upper limit on the size of nova-core and why that is the current size?

I'm not particularly advocating this stance, but it is the context I
need to operate in (where a single veto can kill a nomination). The
argument boils down to there is a communications cost to adding
someone to core, and therefore there is a maximum size before the
communications burden becomes to great.

I will say that I am disappointed that we have cores who don't
regularly attend our IRC meetings. That makes the communication much
more complicated.

Michael

-- 
Rackspace Australia

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to