Excerpts from Michael Krotscheck's message of 2016-08-01 16:06:45 +0000: > FYI- I'm totally in favor of eviction. But... > > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 8:42 AM Doug Hellmann <d...@doughellmann.com> wrote: > > > > > I'm interested in hearing other reasons that we should keep these > > sorts of projects, though. I'm not yet ready to propose the change > > to the policy myself. > > > ...if the social consequences result in that entire team's development > staff effectively exiting OpenStack altogether? This in particular is > pertinent to myself - if Fuel is evicted from the big tent, then it's very > likely that the JavaScript SDK collaboration (which includes several > Fuel-UI developers and has _finally_ taken off) will grind to a halt. > > There's a halo effect to having a project under the big tent - contributors > are already familiar with infra and procedure, and thus the barriers to > cross-project bugfixes are way lower. Perhaps (using Fuel as an example) > the "should this be in the big tent" metric is based on how many > contributors contribute _only_ to Fuel, as opposed to > Fuel-and-other-projects.
Remember that the big tent is projects governed by the TC. Projects can still use gerrit, CI, etc. even if they are not in the big tent. > As a countersuggestion - perhaps the solution to increasing project > diversity is to reduce barriers to cross-project contributions. If the > learning curve of project-shifting was reduced (by agreeing on common web > frameworks, etc), it'd certainly make cross-project bug fixes way easier. I certainly support that, though as Jay points out in his thread on the goals proposal we still want to leave room for experimentation. 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