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 OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev