Julien Danjou wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18 2016, Joshua Harlow wrote:
Thus why I think the starting of the architecture working group is a good
thing; because I have a believe that people are forgetting among all of this
that such a group holds a lot of the keys to the kingdom (whether u, the
reader, want to admit that or not is well the readers problem) in openstack
(sorry and no disrespect to independent folks& contributors), but most of us
work for large companies that have architects (and leads) and if those
architects (and leads) can get together cross-company to aggregate and (agree
on) and solve actual problems then that really is IMHO the only way to keep our
projects healthy (assuming we can even do that at this stage).
I think it is a bit naive to think any working group is going to fix
architectural problems. You know first hand what happened¹ with the Nova
service group and tooz for example.
¹ Nothing.
Totally fair, but I still 'somewhat believe' that something good may
come out of this. No I don't have a lot (I can probably count them on
one hand) success stories with regards to this kind of cross-project
work but it's not so easy to pin-point why things happened this way
(without getting into speculation/theorizing territory).
__________________________________________________________________________
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
