I have known Mr. Taylor for many years and I would like to come out as his first endorser for his big league thoughts and recommendations below.
Brad Topol, Ph.D. IBM Distinguished Engineer OpenStack (919) 543-0646 Internet: bto...@us.ibm.com Assistant: Kendra Witherspoon (919) 254-0680 From: Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> To: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: 09/29/2016 07:29 PM Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] TC candidacy On 09/29/2016 06:14 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > https://review.openstack.org/379850 > > Let's make OpenStack great again. > > If you don't know me, I'm very good. The code and designs I make > are tremendous, and I intend to contribute to the TC bigly. The other > candidates are sad, and they want OpenStack to be a third world project, > no good. > > OpenStack, could be the greatest cloud in the history of clouds, but to > get there, you need me, to make sure our clouds are the greatest. We > need to test the clouds, I'm talking about EXTREME cloud vetting, > EXTREME cloud vetting. You know the other TC's are laughing at us, > because we don't have such a great TC. > > The biggest problem we have is people rewriting parts of OpenStack in Go. > They're bringing threads, they're compiled, with errors handled at the > point of return, and some of them, I assume, are good programmers. So > when I'm elected to the TC, I will build a wall, and make Go pay for it. > > ... > > Ok if you're still reading and you don't take things too seriously, > then hello. I'm Clint Byrum, known as "SpamapS" on IRC, and I want to > serve you on the OpenStack Technical Committee. You may recognize me > from various scalability and deployment discussions. > > OpenStack has a number of challenges that face it in the immediate. There > is a crisis of identity that we're only just now wrapping our arms > around, and a question about whether or not this should be something > decided at a centralized level by the TC or not. Are we a toobox? Are > we a product? Can we be both? These are real things, and the TC should > debate them. However, I don't think the TC should force the community to > do anything it doesn't want to do as a whole. If the community really > wants to end the big tent, we should listen, inform, and debate, and > decide whether or not we think it is in the best interest to do so based > on our own expertise, the experience thus far, and a plan to go forward. > > It is my personal belief that the big tent has largely been a success > for OpenStack project teams, but created a problem of confusion that we > should resolve. The recent efforts to more clearly define OpenStack have > been positive, and I would like to help the TC continue down that road. > > In fact, I have recently started an Architecture Working Group to help > define and shape what OpenStack is at a technical design level. Whether > pieces have been evolved apart from one another, or specifically designed > and built to spec, OpenStack hasn't done a good job of writing some > of those things down. I believe the Architecture Working Group will > be capable of improving that, and I want the TC to have some of that > influence built in. > > So, if you want to see more design, consensus building, and an eye for > scaling on the TC, then please consider casting a vote for me. I nominate this email to be the best email ever sent to an OpenStack list. In fact, I think we should replace the entire TC with this email. This email shall be our leader and I, for one, welcome it gladly. __________________________________________________________________________ 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