Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2016-07-31 15:59:56 +0000: > This sounds good to me. > > What about making it iterative but with a delayed start. Something like: > > There is a grace period of 1 year for projects that newly join the big tent. > After which, the following criteria will be evaluated to keep a project in > the big tent, evaluated at the end of each OpenStack release cycle to keep > the project for the next cycle. The project should not have active cores from > one company in the amount greater then 45% of the active core membership. If > that number is higher, the project is given notice they are under diverse and > have 6 months of remaining in the big tent to show they are attempting to > increase diversity by shifting the ratio to a more diverse active core > membership. The active core membership percentage by the over represented > company, called X%, will be shown to be reduced by 25% or reach 45%, so > max(X% * (100%-25%), 45%). If the criteria is met, the project can remain in > the big tent and a new cycle will begin. (another notification and 6 months > if still out of compliance) > > This should allow projects that are, or become under diverse a path towards > working on project membership diversity. It gives projects that are very far > out of wack a while to fix it. It basically gives projects over represented: > * (80%, 100%] - gets 18 months to fix it > * (60%, 80%] - gets 12 months > * (45%, 60%] - gets 6 months > > Thoughts? The numbers should be fairly easy to change to make for different > amounts of grace period.
I think I understand the motivation behind a progressive deadline like this, but I'd rather keep the implementation simple with a single deadline, even if that means we give some teams what appears to be a more generous amount of time than they need. Doug > > Thanks, > Kevin > ________________________________________ > From: Doug Hellmann [d...@doughellmann.com] > Sent: Sunday, July 31, 2016 7:16 AM > To: openstack-dev > Subject: [openstack-dev] [tc] persistently single-vendor projects > > Starting a new thread from "Re: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] [tc] > Looks like Mirantis is getting Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off" > > Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-07-31 11:37:44 +0200: > > Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > There is only one way for a repository's contents to be considered > > > part of the big tent: It needs to be listed in the projects.yaml > > > file in the openstack/governance repository, associated with a > > > deliverable from a team that has been accepted as a big tent member. > > > > > > The Fuel team has stated that they are not ready to include the > > > work in these new repositories under governance, and indeed the > > > repositories are not listed in the set of deliverables for the Fuel > > > team [1]. > > > > > > Therefore, the situation is clear, to me: They are not part of the > > > big tent. > > > > Reading this thread after a week off, I'd like to +1 Doug's > > interpretation since it was referenced to describe the status quo. > > > > As others have said, we wouldn't even have that discussion if the new > > repositories didn't use "fuel" as part of the naming. We probably > > wouldn't have that discussion either if the Fuel team affiliation was > > more diverse and the new repositories were an experiment of a specific > > subgroup of that team. > > > > NB: I *do* have some concerns about single-vendor OpenStack projects > > that don't grow more diverse affiliations over time, but that's a > > completely separate topic. > > I'm starting to think that perhaps we should add some sort of > expectation of a time-frame for projects that join the big tent as > single-vendor to attract other contributors. > > We removed the requirement that new projects need to have some > minimal level of diversity when they join because projects asserted > that they would have a better chance of attracting other contributors > after becoming official. It might focus the team's efforts on that > priority if we said that after a year or 18 months without any > increased diversity, the project would be removed from the big tent. > > Doug > __________________________________________________________________________ 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
