Re: [openstack-dev] TC Candidacy
Confirmed. On 10/05/2013 05:46 PM, Morgan Fainberg wrote: Hello everyone! I would like propose my candidacy for the OpenStack Technical Committee. A bit about me I have been working with OpenStack in a professional capacity since before the Essex release and have participated in each of the summits since that time. Throughout that timeframe I've been an active participant in most of the projects that make up OpenStack through active communication and collaboration. I am currently a member of the Keystone Core team and almost always available / active on IRC (ensuring I have a good pulse on most of the projects at any given time). During the Havana cycle I have been mostly focused on Keystone, however, I have also contributed to a number of other OpenStack projects. Over the last cycle, I have made sure to attend the TC meetings and keep apprised of the content discussed and decisions made. Platform === As a developer, operator, and consumer of OpenStack, I believe that OpenStack (and, more generally speaking, IaaS) is the way of the future when it comes to managing and maintaining computational resources. I think that OpenStack in particular is a defining force within this space, and as such has a responsibility to help the industry grow in a positive way. This, in no small part, includes bringing new projects online (from incubation to full integration) to fill the gaps in functional coverage and ensuring that both new and already integrated projects are ready for prime-time use. For the next couple of cycles (and beyond), I see the TC's role as not only growing the platform in a stable and maintainable way, but also being an active advocate for the diverse set of consumers of OpenStack (public cloud providers, private cloud providers, enterprise integration, development environments and platforms, QA environments, end consumers of the various cloud installations, etc). The TC should continue to take an active role (in some cases more active) in the project-wide scope direction. This active participation will include continued direct collaboration with the Board of Directors as well as the many contributors (both corporate and individual) of OpenStack. The TC needs to have diverse representation from all corners of the community to ensure that we keep the project moving forward in a way that meets the real needs of all OpenStack users. As part of the TC, I would bring the experience of running multiple diverse private clouds for large enterprises as well as an understanding of the need to maintain and grow the accessibility of OpenStack for all use cases. I look forward to continue contributing as a member of the Keystone Core team and being a vocal advocate for increased usability and ease of deployment for all of OpenStack. I would be honored to also serve as a member of the TC, collaborating, and helping to guide the technical direction of the project as a whole. Cheers, Morgan Fainberg ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] TC candidacy
Confirmed. On 10/04/2013 11:14 AM, Monty Taylor wrote: Hi all! I would like to continue serving the project on the OpenStack TC. Background -- I've been with this bad boy since before day 1, and you can pretty much blame me for trunk gating. You can also blame me for the bzr days - so I'm not going to try to claim that I'm always right. :) I started and until yesterday have been the PTL of the OpenStack Infrastructure team. During my tenure there, we have grown what is quite possibly one of the largest elastic build farms dedicated to a single project anywhere. More importantly than large though, we've spent the effort to make as much of our ops work as is possible completely open and able to receive changes via code review in the exact same manner as the OpenStack projects themselves. The OpenStack Infrastructure system themselves are a scalable application that runs across two clouds. This means that I am, as part of that team, a very large user of OpenStack, which I believe gives me an excellent perspective on what users of OpenStack might want. (hint: vendor differences in how I get a sane hostname on a system I'm spinning up - not what I want) I work a LOT on cross-project coordination, compatibility and automation. I have commits in every single OpenStack repo. In addition to infra, have worked on pbr, hacking, openstack/requirements and oslo.sphinx. I helped battle this cycle's setuptools/distribute re-merge and ensuing upgrade nightmare. I landed patches in tox upstream to allow us to skip the costly sdist step and use setup.py develop directly in the virtualenv. I'm also one of the only people who can have a conversation with ttx about how our version numbers work and understand every nuance. I wrote the code in pbr that encodes the design inside of ttx's brain. Adjacent to OpenStack, I've managed to convince HP to fund me and a group of merry troublemakers to work on OpenStack. One of the things that has sprung from that is the TripleO project. I can't take credit for any of the actual code there, but this is a TC candidacy, not a developer cadidacy, and I think a large portion of being on the TC is being able to steward the success of something both with and without directly coding on it yourself. I'm also a member of the Python Software Foundation and have been working hard this cycle to start to align and integrate better with what upstream Python do. Despite our intent to be good python people, it turns out we do a bunch of things quite differently. Over time, I think it would be better for those differences to decrease. I'm currently working on writing my first PEP. Platform The following was said to me on IRC a couple of day ago. It was not meant as a compliment, but I will take it as one, and I think it quite explicitly sums up why I should be on the TC: mordred: it is infact you who are thinking narrowly *only* considering openstack's goals I believe that OpenStack is One Project. I believe it is in our best interest to be one. I believe that the more we work together across the projects, the more better OpenStack will be. As a TC member, I will continue to strive to enhance the view that OpenStack itself is an important thing and it not just a loose confederation of friendly projects. I have an expansive view of the scope of OpenStack. I do not think that 'pure IaaS' as a limiting factor in the definition serves or will serve any of our users. I think that instead of trying to come up with random or theoretical labels and then keeping ourselves inside of the pre-defined label, we should focus on writing software that solves problems for users. trove and savana are great examples of this. As a user, I want to store my data in a database, and I want to run some map-reduce work. I'm not interested in figuring out the best way to administer a MySQL instance inside of a VM. So, as a user, a database service helps me write scalable cloud-based applications, and having it be part of OpenStack means I can write that scalable cloud-based applications that span multiple clouds. As a TC member, I will continue to support a viewpoint that a consistent set of features across clouds is important to a user, and the more features there are that the user can count on to be in all of the OpenStack clouds, the better the user experience will be. I believe that the users of clouds are our users, not just the deployers of clouds. In fact, if I have to choose between the desires of the users of clouds and the desires of deployers of clouds, I will choose in favor of the users of clouds. As a TC member, I will strive to consider the needs of the end users in discussions we have about coordinated choices and overall shape of OpenStack. Lastly, as a person who only considers OpenStack's goals and does not have a direct affiliation with any of the individual projects, I believe I'm in a good position to mediate issues between projects should they arise. Thus far, I do not
Re: [openstack-dev] TC Candidacy
Confirmed. On 10/04/2013 06:46 PM, James E. Blair wrote: Hi, I'd like to announce my candidacy for the TC. About Me I am the PTL for the OpenStack Infrastructure Program, which I have been helping to build for the past two years. I am responsible for a significant portion of our project infrastructure and developer workflow. I set up gerrit, helped write git-review, and moved all of the OpenStack projects from bzr to git. All of that is to say that I've given a lot of thought and action to helping scale OpenStack to the number of projects and developers it has today. I also wrote zuul, nodepool, and devstack-gate to make sure that we are able to test all components of the project on every commit. There are a lot of moving parts in OpenStack and I strongly believe that at the end of the day they need to work together as a cohesive whole. A good deal of my technical work is focused on achieving that. Throughout my time working on OpenStack I have always put the needs of the whole project first, above those of any individual contributor, organization, or program. I also believe in the values we have established as a project: open source, design, development, and community. To that end, I have worked hard to ensure that the project infrastructure is run just like an OpenStack project, using the same tools and processes, and I think we've succeeding in creating one of the most open operational project infrastructures ever. My Platform === As a significant OpenStack user, I'm excited about the direction that OpenStack is heading. I'm glad that we're accepting new programs that expand the scope of our project to make it more useful for everyone. I believe a major function of the Technical Committee is to curate and shepherd new programs through the incubation process. However, I believe that it should be more involved than it has been. We have been very quick to promote out of integration some exciting new projects that may not have been fully integrated. As a member of the TC, I support our continued growth, and I want to make sure that the ties that hold our collection of projects together are strong, and more than just a marketing umbrella. I have also seen a shift since the formation of the OpenStack Foundation. Our project is a technical meritocracy, but when the Foundation's board of directors was established, some issues of project-wide scope have been taken up by the board of directors while the Technical Committee has been content to limit their involvement. The Foundation board is extremely valuable, and I want the Technical Committee to work closely with them on issues that concern them both. Adding new projects is not the only purpose of the TC, which is charged in the bylaws as being responsible for all technical matters relating to the project. The reformation of the Technical Committee with an all-elected membership provides an opportunity to strengthen the technical meritocracy of the OpenStack project by electing people who will execute the full mission of the TC. I would be happy to serve in that capacity and would appreciate your vote. Thanks, Jim ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
