On 15/11/2014 1:46 am, "Jeremy Stanley" <[email protected]> wrote: > the truth is that work on these projects is entirely > voluntary and we have no effective way to enforce a decree like > that.
I don't think that's entirely correct. A large, potentially overwhelming, majority of committers seem to be paid to work on OpenStack. Proof of this is that we manage to commit to and deliver a large number of features according to a rigorous schedule. I do agree that we do not have a way to enforce this but the community could find one, I'm sure. The community is bound by its own rules and needs to decide whether retiring technical debt is a priority. If it is, then a means of commitment to that goal must be established. That will slow down feature development since the resource pool is finite, and that is no bad thing. > Also, because English is a terribly, terribly nuanced language, I > actually read that "may" as granting permission, not stating an > optional imperative in the RFC sense. And that is correct but it isn't desirable, at least not to me. Roland
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
