On 15 September 2016 at 10:20, Steven Hardy <sha...@redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As we work to finish the last remaining tasks for Newton, it's a good time
> to look back over the cycle, and recognize the excellent work done by
> several new contributors.
>
> We've seen a different contributor pattern develop recently, where many
> folks are subsystem experts and mostly focus on a particular project or
> area of functionality.  I think this is a good thing, and it's hopefully
> going to allow our community to scale more effectively over time (and it
> fits pretty nicely with our new composable/modular architecture).
>
> We do still need folks who can review with the entire TripleO architecture
> in mind, but I'm very confident folks will start out as subsystem experts
> and over time broaden their area of experience to encompass more of
> the TripleO projects (we're already starting to see this IMO).
>
> We've had some discussion in the past[1] about strictly defining subteams,
> vs just adding folks to tripleo-core and expecting good judgement to be
> used (e.g only approve/+2 stuff you're familiar with - and note that it's
> totally fine for a core reviewer to continue to +1 things if the patch
> looks OK but is outside their area of experience).
>
> So, I'm in favor of continuing that pattern and just welcoming some of our
> subsystem expert friends to tripleo-core, let me know if folks feel
> strongly otherwise :)
>
> The nominations, are based partly on the stats[2] and partly on my own
> experience looking at reviews, patches and IRC discussion with these folks
> - I've included details of the subsystems I expect these folks to focus
> their +2A power on (at least initially):
>
> 1. Brent Eagles
>
> Brent has been doing some excellent work mostly related to Neutron this
> cycle - his reviews have been increasingly detailed, and show a solid
> understanding of our composable services architecture.  He's also provided
> a lot of valuable feedback on specs such as dpdk and sr-iov.  I propose
> Brent continues this exellent Neutron focussed work, while also expanding
> his review focus such as the good feedback he's been providing on new
> Mistral actions in tripleo-common for custom-roles.
>
> 2. Pradeep Kilambi
>
> Pradeep has done a large amount of pretty complex work around Ceilomenter
> and Aodh over the last two cycles - he's dealt with some pretty tough
> challenges around upgrades and has consistently provided good review
> feedback and solid analysis via discussion on IRC.  I propose Prad
> continues this excellent Ceilomenter/Aodh focussed work, while also
> expanding review focus aiming to cover more of t-h-t and other repos over
> time.
>
> 3. Carlos Camacho
>
> Carlos has been mostly focussed on composability, and has done a great job
> of working through the initial architecture implementation, including
> writing some very detailed initial docs[3] to help folks make the
> transition
> to the new architecture.  I'd suggest that Carlos looks to maintain this
> focus on composable services, while also building depth of reviews in other
> repos.
>
> 4. Ryan Brady
>
> Ryan has been one of the main contributors implementing the new Mistral
> based API in tripleo-common.  His reviews, patches and IRC discussion have
> consistently demonstrated that he's an expert on the mistral
> actions/workflows and I think it makes sense for him to help with review
> velocity in this area, and also look to help with those subsystems
> interacting with the API such as tripleoclient.
>
> 5. Dan Sneddon
>
> For many cycles, Dan has been driving direction around our network
> architecture, and he's been consistently doing a relatively small number of
> very high-quality and insightful reviews on both os-net-config and the
> network templates for tripleo-heat-templates.  I'd suggest Dan continues
> this focus, and he's indicated he may have more bandwidth to help with
> reviews around networking in future.
>
> Please can I get feedback from exisitng core reviewers - you're free to +1
> these nominations (or abstain), but any -1 will veto the process.  I'll
> wait one week, and if we have consensus add the above folks to
> tripleo-core.
>
> Finally, there are quite a few folks doing great work that are not on this
> list, but seem to be well on track towards core status.  Some of those
> folks I've already reached out to, but if you're not nominated now, please
> don't be disheartened, and feel free to chat to me on IRC about it.  Also
> note the following:
>
>  - We need folks to regularly show up, establishing a long-term pattern of
>    doing useful reviews, but core status isn't about raw number of reviews,
>    it's about consistent downvotes and detailed, well considered and
>    insightful feedback that helps increase quality and catch issues early.
>
>  - Try to spend some time reviewing stuff outside your normal area of
>    expertise, to build understanding of the broader TripleO system - as
>    discussed above subsystem experts are a good thing, but we also need
>    to see some appreciation of the broader Tripleo archticture &
>    interfaces (all the folks above have demonstrated solid knowledge of one
>    or more of our primary interfaces, e.g the Heat or the Mistral layer)
>
> Thanks to everyone for the hard work during Newton, I'm looking forward to
> seeing what we can achieve during Ocata!
>
> Steve
>
> [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-
> June/096968.html
> [2] http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/tripleo-group/90
> [3] http://docs.openstack.org/developer/tripleo-docs/
> developer/tht_walkthrough/tht_walkthrough.html
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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


+1 to all from me.
__________________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to