On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:54:31AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:48:29AM +0000, Chris Dent wrote: > > On Tue, 24 Feb 2015, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > > >need to do more work. If this is so, then I don't think this is a blocker, > > >it is just a sign that the project needs to focus on providing more > > >resources > > >to the teams impacted in that way. > > > > What are the mechanisms whereby the project provides more resources > > to teams?
Along with the below, if push comes to shove, OpenStack Foundation could probably try a milder variant (obviously, not all activities can be categorized as 'critical path') of Linux Foundation's "Critical Infrastructure Protection Initiative"[1] to fund certain project activities in need. > The technical committee and / or foundation board can highlight the > need for investment of resources in critical areas of the project, to > either the community members or vendors involved. As an example, this > was done successfully recently to increase involvement in maintaining > the EC2 API support. There are plenty of vendors involved in > OpenStack which have the ability to target resources, if they can > learn where those resources are best spent. [1] http://www.linuxfoundation.org/programs/core-infrastructure-initiative -- /kashyap __________________________________________________________________________ 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
