> On Oct 17, 2016, at 1:27 PM, Michael Turek <mjtu...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hello ironic!
> At today's IRC meeting, the questions "what should and should not be a
> project be under Ironic's governance" and "what does it mean to be under
> Ironic's governance" were raised. Log here:
> See http://governance.openstack.org/reference/projects/ironic.html for a list
> of projects currently under Ironic's governance.
> Is it as simple as "any project that aides in openstack baremetal deployment
> should be under Ironic's governance"? This is probably too general (nova
> arguably fits here) but it might be a good starting point.
> Another angle to look at might be that a project belongs under the Ironic
> governance when both Ironic (the main services) and the candidate subproject
> would benefit from being under the same governance. A hypothetical example of
> this is when Ironic and the candidate project need to release together.
> Just some initial thoughts to get the ball rolling. What does everyone else
I think there were a lot of people in the meeting who were confused by what
being under governance means. As I understand it, in the strictest sense, it
- Project contributors can vote for TC/PTL
- Project has access to cross-project resources
- Access to summit/PTG time (at PTL’s discretion)
However, I get the impression some folks attach additional connotations to
this; such as the Ironic core team gaining an implied responsibility to the
code or it being seen as a “seal of approval” from Ironic. This means that the
primary question at hand to be answered is what does it matter, specifically
/in the Baremetal project/ to be included in our governance. Is it simply the
benefits provided at a high level by OpenStack, or does it imply additional
things. This is the question we have to answer to make a decision about what
projects should be under Ironic’s governance and what exactly it means.
Unless there’s more to it than I understand right now, I’d prefer an open-arms
approach to projects being in bare metal governance: as long as they’re willing
to follow the 4 opens, and are working toward the goals of the Baremetal
project, I’d rather have those projects and their contributors as part of our
team than not.
> Mike Turek
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)