Excerpts from Joshua Harlow's message of 2015-09-14 08:41:37 -0700: > Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Joshua Harlow wrote: > >> I believe it is the TC job (in part) to help make the community better, > >> and not via tags like this that IMHO actually make it worse; > > > > I think it's important to see the intent of the tag, rather than only > > judge on its current proposed name. The big tent is vast, and there are > > all kinds of projects, more or less mature, in it. The tag system is > > there to help our ecosystem navigate the big tent by providing specific > > bits of information about them. > > > > One such important bit of information is how risky it is to invest on a > > given project, how likely is it to still be around tomorrow. Some > > projects are so dependent on a single organization that they may, > > literally, disappear in one day when a single person (the CEO of that > > organization) decides so. I think our ecosystem should know about that, > > without having to analyze stackalytics data. This is why I support > > creating a tag describing project teams that are *extremely* fragile, at > > the other end of the spectrum from projects that are "healthily diverse". > > > >> I really > >> hope that folks on the TC can look back at their own projects they may > >> have created and ask how would their own project have turned out if they > >> were stamped with a similar tag... > > > > The thing is, one of the requirements to become an official OpenStack > > project in the "integrated release" model was to reach a given level of > > diversity in contributors. So "our" OpenStack projects just could not > > officially exist if they would have been stamped with a similar tag. > > > > The big tent is more inclusive, as we no longer consider diversity > > before we approve a project. The tag is the other side of the coin: we > > still need to inform our ecosystem that some projects are less mature or > > more fragile than others. The tag doesn't prevent the project to exist > > in OpenStack, it just informs our users that there is a level of risk > > associated with it. > > > > Or are you suggesting it is preferable to hide that risk from our > > operators/users, to protect that project team developers ? > > Not really. I get the idea of informing operators/users about how this > project may need more contributors. I just want it to be a positive > statement vs. a negative one if possible; and I'd really like for the TC > to also have some kind of proposal for helping those projects get to be > more diverse (vs just labeling them). > > Some ideas already mentioned + new ones: > > * Put the project on some kind of 'help wanted' page. > * Help said projects sign-up for google summer of code (that may help > increase diversity?).
We're talking specifically about affiliation diversity. I'm not sure how we would indicate student affiliation (independent? their university? the company of their mentor?). I'm also not sure that a few short-term helpers is necessarily going to improve any project's overall situation in terms of affiliation diversity. Doug > * Something else? > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ 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