Excerpts from Ed Leafe's message of 2016-10-04 14:31:45 -0500: > On Oct 4, 2016, at 11:54 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org> wrote: > > >> In French, "prétendre" has a connotation of "profess" or simply > >> "say", which is very different from the more negative connotation > >> of "pretend" in English where common use implies some false intent. > >> Knowing Thierry and his past contributions well enough to trust his > >> good intentions, I was able to look past the awkward phrasing to > >> ask what message he was trying to convey. > > > > Yeah, sorry for the poor choice of words, I didn't mean that candidates > > are trying to deceive anyone. I only meant that in my experience, past > > members of the TC were overly optimistic in their campaign emails about > > how much they thought they would be able to achieve. So looking at the > > past track record is important. > > A great example of knowing the person. It sounded harsh to me when I read it, > too, but knowing Thierry so well, I understood the intent. Had that been an > anonymous comment, I wouldn’t have made that mental adjustment. > > So maybe anonymous isn’t the way to go. But we really do need to do several > things: > > 1) Allow time between the nominations and the voting. Half of the candidates > don’t announce until the last day or two, and that doesn’t leave very much > time to get to know them.
It seems like a reasonable idea, but why limit the period where we discuss these "big issues" to a week or so every 6 months? > 2) I like the idea of identifying the issues that the people of OpenStack > care about, and having every candidate give their answers. One thing I worry > about, though, is the time zone difference. Candidate A publishes their > answers early, and gets a lot of reaction. Candidate Z, in a later timezone, > publishes their answers after the discussions have played out already. Let’s > release the answers all at once. I think I understand the goal of doing that, but it doesn't lend itself very well to having a conversation about the topics and I tend to think a conversation is more enlightening than a position paper. I quite like Gordon's approach to this problem. He had a question, and he asked it on the ML. I would have liked it if it was asked earlier, but I'm extremely happy that it was asked at all so I'm not going to complain about the timing. > 3) We need to find a way to at least *reduce* the effect of incumbency. Not > that I have any particular incumbent in mind, of course, but any group of > people gets set in their ways unless the membership changes regularly. > > And let me reiterate: I’m a candidate for the TC, and not an incumbent. So of > course this seems a bit self-serving, especially to an outsider who might not > know me very well. But I’m sure that Thierry and Doug and others, who have > known me for many years, understand my intent: to keep improving OpenStack. Definitely. I appreciate your willingness to explore options, even if I don't necessarily agree with the proposals. 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
