On 01/27/2015 06:05 PM, Jonathan Bryce wrote: > >> 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?
Right now we're starting from a set list of pre-approved names that there was absolutely no participation in the selection of and about which discussion is summarily shut down. I know it's with the best of intentions, but it's not ok. >> 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). I was under the impression that the human names were "development codenames" and also this was a topic of discussion at the TC meeting today, which is why I popped it to the dev list - no slight or exclusion was intended! I have cross-posted this reply to foundat...@lists.openstack.org and market...@lists.openstack.org. You'll notice that I did say in my suggestion that ANYONE should be able to propose a name - I believe that would include non-dev people. Since the people in question are marketing people, I would imagine that if any of them feel strongly about a name, that it should be trivial for them to make their case in a persuasive way. I'm not willing to cede that choosing the name is by definition a marketing activity - and in fact the sense that such a position was developing is precisely why I think it's time to get this sorted. I think the dev community feels quite a bit of ownership on this topic and I would like to keep it that way. Thanks! Monty __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev