> On Jan 27, 2015, at 3:50 PM, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> wrote:
> I do not like how we are selecting names for our releases right now.
> The current process is autocratic and opaque and not fun - which is the
> exact opposite of what a community selected name should be.

Autocratic? Could you elaborate?

> I propose:
> * As soon as development starts on release X, we open the voting for the
> name of release X+1 (we're working on Kilo now, we should have known the
> name of L at the K summit)
> * Anyone can nominate a name - although we do suggest that something at
> least related to the location of the associated summit would be nice
> * We condorcet vote on the entire list of nominated names
> * After we have the winning list, the foundation trademark checks the name
> * If there is a trademark issue (and only a trademark issue - not a
> "marketing doesn't like the name" issue) we'll move down to the next
> name on the list
> If we cannot have this process be completely open and democratic, then
> what the heck is the point of having our massive meritocracy in the
> first place? There's a lot of overhead we deal with by being a
> leaderless collective you know - we should occasionally get to have fun
> with it.

If your goal is to actually involve our massive meritocracy, I’d suggest 
expanding this thread to include at least the community marketing mailing list 
rather than just the -dev mailing list (possibly also the Foundation mailing 
list?). The release names are some of our most prominent brands, meaning 
choosing them is by definition a marketing activity. Not including the part of 
our meritocracy with experience in branding and marketing feels 
counterintuitive to me (again if the goal is actually to be meritocratic).


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to