John, Thanks for the questions, it Ill really help me to make a the best choice. I hadn't pondered the first question . +1 to make those and other if suggest part of the candidate proposal.
Erlon On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 6:49 AM, Duncan Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi John. Thanks for the questions. > > >> 1. Do you actually have the time to spend to be PTL >> > > I'm very much aware, and discussed with my management prior to standing, > that being PTL is a pretty much full time job. I realise I'm somewhat > limited by not being in a US time zone, however I'm pretty flexible with > working hours, and already spend a few evening a week working US hours. I'd > also like to use my time-zone shift as an advantage - I'm aware of how > difficult it is for non-US contributors to get really involved in cinder > due to our (generally very efficient) IRC-centric nature. I'd like to see > if we can make better use of the tools we have for getting attention on > bugs, features and reviews. > > > 2. What are your plans to make the Cinder project as a core component >> better (no... really, what specifically and how does it make Cinder better)? >> > > My main worry with Cinder is that we're drifting away from the core vision > of both Openstack and the original Cinder team - A really good cloud, with > really good block storage, no matter the technology behind it. We've so > many half-finished features, APIs that only work under limited > circumstances and general development debt that is seriously hurting us > going forward. The new features being proposed are getting more niche, more > 'everything and the kitchen sink' and less 'top quality, rock solid > service'. I'd like to shift a focus on back-to-basics, and work on fixing > the road blocks to fixing these issues - we have plenty of competent > motivated people, but communication and bureaucratic issues issues both > within our team and between cinder and other projects (primarily but not > limited to nova and glance) have gotten in the way. > > Things I'd like to see done this cycle: > - Python3 work - let's just push through it and get it done. Maybe focus > on it exclusively for a few days or a week some time this cycle. It's > dragging on, and since we aren't at the point where cinder actually runs > under python3, new problems slip in regularly. > > - Replication, CGs, online backup etc rolled out to more drivers. Lets > limit the amount of new things drivers need to add this cycle until we've > caught up on the backlog. > > - Nova <-> cinder API. Fixing this in a way that works for the nova team > appears to need micro-versions. This API has been a thorn in our side for > all sorts of new features and bugs many times, let's tame it. > > - Making CI failures easier to understand. I really struggle to read most > CI failures, and so don't follow up on them as often as I should. I'm sure > I'm not alone. I'm convinced that a small amount of work with white space, > headings etc in devstack and tempest logs could give a really big boost. > I'd also like to see a state other than 'failed' for situations where there > was a problem with the CI system itself and so it didn't get as far as > trying to deploy devstack. As I mentioned, we've enough smart people to > make improvements that should allow us all to be more productive > > - Reducing review noise. I suspect that some policing and emailing people > to improve etiquette on reviews (don't -1 for spelling and grammar, don't > post a review until it is ready to be reviewed, give people time to batch > comments rather than posting a new version for every nit, etc) will pay > off, but it needs time dedicated to it. > > - Less out-of-band discussion on community decisions. I'm a big believer > that discussion on record and in public, either on IRC or email, has much > more value than private discussions and public statements. It also reduces > accusations of bias and unfairness. > > >> 3. Why do you want to be PTL for Cinder? >> > > I wan to see cinder continue to succeed. My code contributions have, for > various reasons, reduced in quantity and value against my efforts on > mentoring, designs, reviews and communications. I'd like to free up the > people who are actually writing good code to do more of that, by taking on > more of the non-code burden and working to remove road blocks that are > stopping people from making progress - be those internally with-in the > team, between openstack teams or even helping people solve problems > (managerial, legal or educational) within their own companies. I've had a > fair bit of success at that in the past, and I believe that now is the time > when those skills are the most effective ones to move cinder forward. We've > a great technical team, so I want to enable them to do more, while keeping > on top of scope creep and non-standardisation enough to enable cinder to be > what I and many others would like it be. > > > > > I hope this helps people with their decision. Whomever wins, I have high > hopes for the future, there is nobody standing who hasn't been a pleasure > to work with in the past, and I don't expect that to change in the future. > > -- > Duncan Thomas > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
