On 20 February 2016 at 12:58, Steven Dake (stdake) <std...@cisco.com> wrote:
> Neutron, the largest project in OpenStack by active committers and > reviewers as measured by the governance repository teamstats tool, has a > limit of 2 core reviewers per company. They do that for a reason. I > expect Kolla will grow over time (we are about 1/4 their size in terms of > contributors and reviewers). I believe other projects follow a similar > pattern besides Neutron that already have good diversity (and intend to > keep it in place). > Where did you find this information? I do not believe this is true. I agree wholeheartedly with Joshua: I personally value the judgement of the people I trust rather than looking at affiliation. > > Regards > -steve > > > From: Gal Sagie <gal.sa...@gmail.com> > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Date: Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 10:38 AM > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [kolla] discussion about core reviewer > limitations by company > > I think setting these limits is wrong, some companies have more overall > representation then others. > The core reviewer job should be on a personal basis and not on a company > basis, i think the PTL of each project needs > to make sure the diversity and the community voice is heard in each > project and the correct path is taken even if > many (or even if all) of the cores are from the same company. > If you really want to set limits then i would go with something like 2 > cores from the same company cannot +2 the same patch, but > again i am against such things personally.. > > Disclaimer: i am not personally involved in Kolla or know how things are > running there. > > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 7:09 PM, Steven Dake (stdake) <std...@cisco.com> > wrote: > >> Hey folks, >> >> Mirantis has been developing a big footprint in the core review team, and >> Red Hat already has a big footprint in the core review team. These are all >> good things, but I want to avoid in the future a situation in which one >> company has a majority of core reviewers. Since core reviewers set policy >> for the project, the project could be harmed if one company has such a >> majority. This is one reason why project diversity is so important and has >> its own special snowflake tag in the governance repository. >> >> I'd like your thoughts on how to best handle this situation, before I >> trigger a vote we can all agree on. >> >> I was thinking of something simple like: >> "1 company may not have more then 33% of core reviewers. At the >> conclusion of PTL elections, the current cycle's 6 months of reviews >> completed will be used as a metric to select the core reviewers from that >> particular company if the core review team has shrunk as a result of >> removal of core reviewers during the cycle." >> >> Thoughts, comments, questions, concerns, etc? >> >> Regards, >> -steve >> >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Best Regards , > > The G. > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > >
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
