Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-05-04 10:25:10 -0700:
So Thierry I agree. Developers are required to make it happen. I would say
however that acknowledging the importance of developer contributions and
selecting leadership from the development community is really half the
battle as
On 05/05/15 18:10, Adam Lawson wrote:
I think the ATC thing came up as one avenue to explore when folks were
trying to figure out ways to quantify Operator involvement for the
purpose of identifying who are actively contributing to OpenStack
versus those who are fans/users of OpenStack but
Doug, it isn't about me or about trying to add more to the pool of one type
of contributor from a different pool of individuals with a different
skillset or about attempting to make shortcuts to leadership as you so
delicately put it. Frankly I think you're missing the point. When there is
a
Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-05-05 07:01:48 -0700:
Doug, it isn't about me or about trying to add more to the pool of one type
of contributor from a different pool of individuals with a different
skillset or about attempting to make shortcuts to leadership as you so
delicately
On 05/05/15 16:01, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-05-04 10:25:10 -0700:
So Thierry I agree. Developers are required to make it happen. I would say
however that acknowledging the importance of developer contributions and
selecting leadership from the
I think the ATC thing came up as one avenue to explore when folks were
trying to figure out ways to quantify Operator involvement for the purpose
of identifying who are actively contributing to OpenStack versus those who
are fans/users of OpenStack but don't have time right now to contribute
more
Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
It is not only the representation - it is also action on the feedback.
There was an OPS summit not so long ago in Philadelphia [1]. Two full
days. I personally did not participate but from what I heard it was a
good two days of discussions.
It was. I was there.
Excerpts from Maish Saidel-Keesing's message of 2015-05-05 18:00:15 +0300:
On 05/05/15 16:01, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-05-04 10:25:10 -0700:
So Thierry I agree. Developers are required to make it happen. I would say
however that acknowledging the
Thiery - Most operators are busy fighting operational battles, scale out etc.
It is often an all-hands-on-the-deck job. I don’t think we should just measure
by contributors getting work done. The work is often silent, and lags behind
the dev cycle.
Subbu
On May 4, 2015, at 9:25 AM, Thierry
Le 05/05/2015 18:00, Thierry Carrez a écrit :
Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
It is not only the representation - it is also action on the feedback.
There was an OPS summit not so long ago in Philadelphia [1]. Two full
days. I personally did not participate but from what I heard it was a
good
On 05/05/15 19:14, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/05/2015 18:00, Thierry Carrez a écrit :
Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
It is not only the representation - it is also action on the feedback.
There was an OPS summit not so long ago in Philadelphia [1]. Two full
days. I personally did not
I think that this will be my last say on this matter, because it seems
to be getting out of hand.
Us vs. them.
Dev vs. Ops.
It could be perceived that I am trying to wage a 'war' on the OpenStack
development process, on the Developers, but that is not the case.
But I do think there are valid
Le 05/05/2015 18:41, Maish Saidel-Keesing a écrit :
On 05/05/15 19:14, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
Le 05/05/2015 18:00, Thierry Carrez a écrit :
Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
It is not only the representation - it is also action on the feedback.
There was an OPS summit not so long ago in
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Maish Saidel-Keesing mais...@maishsk.com
wrote:
And perhaps it could also be a good idea to have developers deploy and
operate a highly available geographically dispersed OpenStack
implementation trying to adhere to a defined SLA?
Many do. Don't forget that
On 05/05/15 19:00, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
It is not only the representation - it is also action on the feedback.
There was an OPS summit not so long ago in Philadelphia [1]. Two full
days. I personally did not participate but from what I heard it was a
good two
On 05/05/15 19:22, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Maish Saidel-Keesing's message of 2015-05-05 18:00:15 +0300:
On 05/05/15 16:01, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-05-04 10:25:10 -0700:
So Thierry I agree. Developers are required to make it happen. I would
Excerpts from Maish Saidel-Keesing's message of 2015-05-05 19:52:24 +0300:
On 05/05/15 19:22, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Maish Saidel-Keesing's message of 2015-05-05 18:00:15 +0300:
On 05/05/15 16:01, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-05-04 10:25:10
On 5/5/15, 6:52 PM, Maish Saidel-Keesing mais...@maishsk.com wrote:
On 05/05/15 19:22, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Maish Saidel-Keesing's message of 2015-05-05 18:00:15
+0300:
On 05/05/15 16:01, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-05-04 10:25:10 -0700:
ups
Morgan Fainberg wrote:
On Friday, May 1, 2015, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com
mailto:rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/01/2015 02:22 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
The spec review process has made it much easier for operators to see
what is being proposed and give input.
I'd like to go back to the beginning to clarify something.
On 04/29/2015 02:34 PM, Adam Lawson wrote:
So I started replying to Doug's email in a different thread but didn't want
to hi-jack that so I figured I'd present my question as a more general
question about how voting is handled for the
On 05/04/15 17:07, Anita Kuno wrote:
I'd like to go back to the beginning to clarify something.
On 04/29/2015 02:34 PM, Adam Lawson wrote:
So I started replying to Doug's email in a different thread but didn't want
to hi-jack that so I figured I'd present my question as a more general
question
On 05/04/2015 10:46 AM, Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
On 05/04/15 17:07, Anita Kuno wrote:
I'd like to go back to the beginning to clarify something.
On 04/29/2015 02:34 PM, Adam Lawson wrote:
So I started replying to Doug's email in a different thread but
didn't want
to hi-jack that so I
Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
A three point triangle. I like the idea! Anita I assume that you are
talking about the TC[3], the board [1] and the user committee [2].
I honestly do not see this at the moment as an equally weighted triangle.
Should they be? Perhaps not, maybe yes.
It could be
Excerpts from Maish Saidel-Keesing's message of 2015-05-04 17:46:21 +0300:
On 05/04/15 17:07, Anita Kuno wrote:
I'd like to go back to the beginning to clarify something.
On 04/29/2015 02:34 PM, Adam Lawson wrote:
So I started replying to Doug's email in a different thread but didn't want
So Thierry I agree. Developers are required to make it happen. I would say
however that acknowledging the importance of developer contributions and
selecting leadership from the development community is really half the
battle as it's pretty rare to see project teams led and governed by only
On 05/04/2015 01:11 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Maish Saidel-Keesing's message of 2015-05-04 17:46:21 +0300:
On 05/04/15 17:07, Anita Kuno wrote:
I'd like to go back to the beginning to clarify something.
On 04/29/2015 02:34 PM, Adam Lawson wrote:
So I started replying to Doug's
On 2015-05-04 10:25:10 -0700 (-0700), Adam Lawson wrote:
[...]
it's pretty rare to see project teams led and governed by only
developers.
[...]
Not sure what other free software projects you've worked on/with
before but not only is it not rare, it's the vast majority of them.
--
Jeremy Stanley
Davanum Srinivas wrote:
One concrete suggestion based on my experience working with Kris
Lindgren on Heartbeat patch:
http://markmail.org/message/gifrt5f3mslco24j
I could have added a Co-Tested-By (or Co-Operator - get it? :) in
my commit message which would have signaled a concrete
Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-05-01 09:06:20 -0700:
So this is an interesting idea. Would we require operators co-author/review
all patches that land? if not (and that actually strikes me as making
uploading patches more difficult unnecessarily), My question is how
Operators can
So this is an interesting idea. Would we require operators co-author/review
all patches that land? if not (and that actually strikes me as making
uploading patches more difficult unnecessarily), My question is how
Operators can easily get involved with that process.
If Operators want to get
On Friday, May 1, 2015, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/01/2015 02:22 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
The spec review process has made it much easier for operators to see
what is being proposed and give input.
Recognition is a different topic. It also comes into who would be the
The spec review process has made it much easier for operators to see what is
being proposed and give input.
Recognition is a different topic. It also comes into who would be the
operator/user electorate ? ATC is simple to define where the equivalent
operator/user definition is less clear.
On 05/01/2015 02:22 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
The spec review process has made it much easier for operators to see
what is being proposed and give input.
Recognition is a different topic. It also comes into who would be the
operator/user electorate ? ATC is simple to define where the equivalent
I purposely didn't email the general mailing list since I didn't want to
cross-post, hard to have these discussions across verticals and choosing
one list = hearing one community - those subscribed to the developer
mailing list.
So I'm not assuming anything, it seems some are suggesting that
On 04/30/15 10:15, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Doug Hellmann wrote:
Anyway, I find it curious that the TC is elected by those within the
developer community but TC candidates talk about representing the operator
community who are not allowed to vote. Operators meaning Admins,
Architects, etc. It
Doug Hellmann wrote:
Anyway, I find it curious that the TC is elected by those within the
developer community but TC candidates talk about representing the operator
community who are not allowed to vote. Operators meaning Admins,
Architects, etc. It sounds like this is something most TC
On 30/04/15 12:07 +0300, Maish Saidel-Keesing wrote:
On 04/30/15 10:15, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Doug Hellmann wrote:
Anyway, I find it curious that the TC is elected by those within the
developer community but TC candidates talk about representing the
operator
For the record, thanks for your replies guys. I am not suggesting any
specific means to resolve or suggesting what we're doing is wrong; only
that the current structure seems odd.
The TC charter, as I read it, states that the TC committee represents
everything of a technical nature of OpenStack
One concrete suggestion based on my experience working with Kris
Lindgren on Heartbeat patch:
http://markmail.org/message/gifrt5f3mslco24j
I could have added a Co-Tested-By (or Co-Operator - get it? :) in
my commit message which would have signaled a concrete
contribution/feedback with specific
On 1 May 2015 at 13:24, Davanum Srinivas dava...@gmail.com wrote:
One concrete suggestion based on my experience working with Kris
Lindgren on Heartbeat patch:
http://markmail.org/message/gifrt5f3mslco24j
I could have added a Co-Tested-By (or Co-Operator - get it? :) in
my commit message
I think it's easy to quantify a code contributor since we have systems that
monitor activity - who contributed, what they contributed and when. But we
don't have a system that monitors operator activity and honestly, that's
the question mark for which I really don't have any answers. That might be
On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 12:26 +0200, Flavio Percoco wrote:
I've seen the number of threads to discuss Ops topics increase in
openstack-dev and the influence of Ops - even just points of views
inherited from the feedback we've got - on reviews has gotten better
as well.
Fantastic, that has
On Apr 29, 2015, at 1:34 PM, Adam Lawson alaw...@aqorn.com wrote:
Anyway, I find it curious that the TC is elected by those within the
developer community but TC candidates talk about representing the operator
community who are not allowed to vote. Operators meaning Admins, Architects,
So I started replying to Doug's email in a different thread but didn't want
to hi-jack that so I figured I'd present my question as a more general
question about how voting is handled for the TC.
Anyway, I find it curious that the TC is elected by those within the
developer community but TC
Excerpts from Adam Lawson's message of 2015-04-29 11:34:40 -0700:
So I started replying to Doug's email in a different thread but didn't want
to hi-jack that so I figured I'd present my question as a more general
question about how voting is handled for the TC.
Anyway, I find it curious that
45 matches
Mail list logo
