On Mar 10, 2015, at 6:00 PM, Devananda van der Veen devananda@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:12 PM Lauren Sell lau...@openstack.org
mailto:lau...@openstack.org wrote:
- Operators don’t want the wild west. They are nervous about dissolving the
integrated release,
Ed Leafe wrote:
[...]
So what is production-ready? And how would you trust any such
designation? I think that it should be the responsibility of groups
outside of OpenStack development to make that call.
We discussed that particular point at the Ops Summit: how to describe
and objectively
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 12:29 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the
OpenStack blog
On 03/10/2015 12:47 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 12:46 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
I think we made it pretty clear that we would be taking approvals
slowly, and that we might not approve any new projects before the
summit, precisely for the reasons you state here. I have
Some clarification about Murano:
3. *Maybe*. Not sure about the scope, it is fairly broad and there may be
some open ended corners, such as some references to billing. On the other
hand an application catalog sounds really useful and like a measured
progression for OpenStack as a whole. Murano
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:29 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the
OpenStack blog [1].
Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being
-Original Message-
From: Jeremy Stanley [mailto:fu...@yuggoth.org]
Sent: 11 March 2015 20:40
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Avoiding regression in project governance
On 2015-03-11 19:06:21 + (+), Tim Bell
On 2015-03-11 19:06:21 + (+), Tim Bell wrote:
[...]
I think we can make this work. Assuming more than N (to my mind
5 or so) deployments report they are using project X, we can say
that this is used in production/POC/... and the number of
nodes/hypervisors/etc.
This makes it
On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 15:23 -0700, James E. Blair wrote:
The holy grail of this system would be the suitable for production
deployment tag, but no one has figured out how to define it yet.
Are crazy ideas welcome in this phase?
I start with 2 below:
Preface: an idea circulates about visually
-Original Message-
From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:stef...@openstack.org]
Sent: 11 March 2015 03:16
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Avoiding regression in project governance
On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 15:23 -0700, James E. Blair wrote:
The holy grail
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 10:16 PM, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 15:23 -0700, James E. Blair wrote:
The holy grail of this system would be the suitable for production
deployment tag, but no one has figured out how to define it yet.
Are crazy ideas welcome in this phase?
On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 17:59 -0500, Ed Leafe wrote:
The longer we try to be both sides of this process, the longer we will
continue to have these back-and-forths about stability vs. innovation.
If I understand correctly your model, it works only for users/operators
who decide to rely on a vendor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/11/2015 02:40 PM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
I think we can make this work. Assuming more than N (to my mind
5 or so) deployments report they are using project X, we can say
that this is used in production/POC/... and the number of
On 11 March 2015 at 05:29, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the
OpenStack blog [1].
Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being part of
On 11/03/15 19:06 +, Tim Bell wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:stef...@openstack.org]
Sent: 11 March 2015 03:16
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Avoiding regression in project governance
On Tue, 2015-03-10 at 15:23 -0700
-Original Message-
From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:stef...@openstack.org]
Sent: 12 March 2015 00:26
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Avoiding regression in project governance
On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 17:59 -0500, Ed Leafe wrote:
The longer we try
On 2015-03-10 23:00:16 + (+), Devananda van der Veen wrote:
Many of those requirements were subjective (well tested, well
documented, etc) and had to be evaluated by the TC. Are these the
sort of tags you're referring to? If so, and if the TC delegated
responsibility to manage the
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the
OpenStack blog [1].
Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 12:46 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 12:29 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the
OpenStack blog [1].
Part of
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 12:29 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the
OpenStack blog [1].
Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being part of the
Russell Bryant wrote:
[...]
We now have several new project proposals. However, I propose not
approving any new projects until we have a tagging system that is at
least far enough along to represent the set of criteria that we used to
apply to all OpenStack projects (with exception for ones
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 3:31 PM, James E. Blair cor...@inaugust.com wrote:
Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com writes:
After watching the TC meeting, and double checking with the meeting notes
[0], it looks like the magnum vote was deferred to next week. But what
concerns me is the lack of
Dissolving the integrated release without having a solid plan and replacement
is difficult to communicate to people who depend on OpenStack. We’re struggling
on that front.
That said, I’m still optimistic about project structure reform and think it
could be beneficial to the development
On 03/10/2015 12:29 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the
OpenStack blog [1].
Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being part of the
OpenStack community.
On 2015-03-10 14:42:18 -0400 (-0400), Russell Bryant wrote:
[...]
As to specific tags, I refer back to this:
http://governance.openstack.org/reference/incubation-integration-requirements.html
We worked pretty hard to come up with useful things for projects
to aim for. In fact, we
Russell Bryant wrote:
One point of clarification:
On 03/10/2015 02:28 PM, Gabriel Hurley wrote:
Even more concerning is the sentiment of projects we want to
consciously drop from Russell's original email.
This was in reference to criteria defined in:
, at least
unless you all plan on changing the governance yet again.
- Gabriel
-Original Message-
From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:00 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Avoiding regression in project
One point of clarification:
On 03/10/2015 02:28 PM, Gabriel Hurley wrote:
Even more concerning is the sentiment of projects we want to
consciously drop from Russell's original email.
This was in reference to criteria defined in:
On 03/10/2015 02:00 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Russell Bryant wrote:
[...]
We now have several new project proposals. However, I propose not
approving any new projects until we have a tagging system that is at
least far enough along to represent the set of criteria that we used to
apply to
On 10/03/15 12:29, Russell Bryant wrote:
I feel that we're at a very vulnerable part of this transition. We've
abolished the incubation process and integrated release. We've
established a fairly low bar for new projects [2]. However, we have not
yet approved*any* tags other than the one
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in
project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the
OpenStack blog [1].
Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being
On 03/10/2015 02:43 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Joe Gordon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com
mailto:rbry...@redhat.com wrote:
We now have several new project proposals. However, I propose not
approving any new projects until we have a tagging
On 03/10/2015 02:56 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Russell Bryant wrote:
One point of clarification:
On 03/10/2015 02:28 PM, Gabriel Hurley wrote:
Even more concerning is the sentiment of projects we want to
consciously drop from Russell's original email.
This was in reference to criteria
[1] https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Project_Proposals:Main
-jay
- Gabriel
-Original Message- From: Thierry Carrez
[mailto:thie...@openstack.org] Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 11:00
AM To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev]
Avoiding regression
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/03/15 12:29, Russell Bryant wrote:
I feel that we're at a very vulnerable part of this transition. We've
abolished the incubation process and integrated release. We've
established a fairly low bar for new
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 05:27 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com wrote:
On 10/03/15 12:29, Russell Bryant wrote:
I feel that we're at a very vulnerable part of this transition. We've
abolished the incubation process and
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 3:00 PM, Doug Hellmann d...@doughellmann.com
wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 05:27 PM, Joe Gordon wrote:
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com
wrote:
On 10/03/15 12:29, Russell Bryant wrote:
I feel that we're at a very
Russell Bryant rbry...@redhat.com writes:
Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being part of the
OpenStack community. Another critical part was replacing the integrated
release with a set of tags. A project would be given a tag if it meets
some defined set of criteria.
...
I
Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com writes:
After watching the TC meeting, and double checking with the meeting notes
[0], it looks like the magnum vote was deferred to next week. But what
concerns me is the lack of action items assigned that will help make sure
next weeks discussion isn't just
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:12 PM Lauren Sell lau...@openstack.org wrote:
Dissolving the integrated release without having a solid plan and
replacement is difficult to communicate to people who depend on OpenStack.
We’re struggling on that front.
That said, I’m still optimistic about project
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:00 PM Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
On 2015-03-10 14:42:18 -0400 (-0400), Russell Bryant wrote:
[...]
As to specific tags, I refer back to this:
http://governance.openstack.org/reference/incubation-
integration-requirements.html
We worked pretty
41 matches
Mail list logo
