Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 18-12

[David Moreau Simard]

In case people have missed it, Jim Blair sent an email recently to
shed some light on where Zuul is headed [1].

[1]: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-March/128396.html

David Moreau Simard
Senior Software Engineer | OpenStack RDO

dmsimard = [irc, github, twitter]


On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 7:24 PM, Chris Dent  wrote:
>
> HTML: https://anticdent.org/tc-report-18-12.html
>
> This week's TC Report goes off in the weeds a bit with the editorial
> commentary from yours truly. I had trouble getting started, so had
> to push myself through some thinking by writing stuff that at least
> for the last few weeks I wouldn't normally be including in the
> summaries. After getting through it, I realized that the reason I
> was struggling is because I haven't been including these sorts of
> things. Including them results in a longer and more meandering report
> but it is more authentically my experience, which was my original
> intention.
>
> # Zuul Extraction and the Difficult Nature of Communication
>
> Last [Tuesday
> Morning](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-13.log.html#t2018-03-13T17:22:38)
> we had some initial discussion about Zuul being extracted from
> OpenStack governance as a precursor to becoming part of the CI/CD
> strategic area being born elsewhere in the OpenStack Foundation.
>
> Then on
> [Thursday](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-15.log.html#t2018-03-15T15:08:06)
> we revisited the topic, especially as it related to how we
> communicate change in the community and how we invite participation
> in making decisions about change. In this case by "community" we're
> talking about anything under the giant umbrella of "stuff associated
> with the OpenStack Foundation".
>
> Plenty of people expressed that though they were not surprised by
> the change, it was because they are insiders and could understand
> how some, who are not, might be surprised by what seemed like a big
> change. This led to addressing the immediate shortcomings and
> clarifying the history of the event.
>
> There was also
> [concern](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-15.log.html#t2018-03-15T15:27:22)
> that some of the reluctance to talk openly about the change appeared
> to stem from needing to preserve the potency of a Foundation marketing
> release.
>
> I [expressed some
> frustration](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-15.log.html#t2018-03-15T15:36:50):
> "...as usual, we're getting caught up in
> details of a particular event (one that in the end we're all happy
> to see happen), rather than the general problem we saw with it
> (early transparency etc). Solving the immediate problem is easy, but
> since we _keep doing it_, we've got a general issues to resolve."
>
> We went round and round about the various ways in which we have tried
> and failed to do good communication in the past, and while we make
> some progress, we fail to establish a pattern. As Doug [pointed
> out](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-15.log.html#t2018-03-15T15:41:33),
> no method can be 100% successful, but if we pick a method and stick to
> it, people can learn that method.
>
> We have a cycle where we not only sometimes communicate poorly but
> we also communicate poorly about that poor communication. So when I
> come round to another week of writing this report, and am reminded
> that these issues persist and I am once again communicating about
> them, it's frustrating. Communicating, a lot, is generally a good
> thing, but if things don't change as a result, that can be a strain.
> If I'm still writing these things in a year's time, and we haven't
> managed to achieve at least a bit more grace, consistency, and
> transparency in the ways that we share information within and
> between groups (including, and maybe especially, the Foundation
> executive wing) in the wider community, it will be a shame and I will
> have a sad.
>
> In a somewhat related and good sign, there is [great
> thread](http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2018-March/014994.html)
> on the operators list that raises the potential of merging the Ops
> Meeting and the PTG into some kind of "OpenStack Community Working
> Gathering".
>
> # Encouraging Upstream Contribution
>
> On
> [Friday](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-16.log.html#t2018-03-16T14:29:21),
> tbarron raised some interesting questions about how the summit talk
> selection process might relate to the [four
> opens](https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/opens.html).  The
> talk eventually led to a positive plan to try bring some potential
> contributors upstream in advance of summit as, well as to work to
> create more clear guidelines for track chairs.
>
> # Executive Power
>
> I had 

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 18-12

[Sean McGinnis]

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 11:24:19PM +, Chris Dent wrote:
> 
> HTML: https://anticdent.org/tc-report-18-12.html
> 
> This week's TC Report goes off in the weeds a bit with the editorial
> commentary from yours truly. I had trouble getting started, so had
> to push myself through some thinking by writing stuff that at least
> for the last few weeks I wouldn't normally be including in the
> summaries. After getting through it, I realized that the reason I
> was struggling is because I haven't been including these sorts of
> things. Including them results in a longer and more meandering report
> but it is more authentically my experience, which was my original
> intention.
> 

++

Thanks for doing this Chris!


__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

[openstack-dev] [tc] [all] TC Report 18-12

[Chris Dent]

HTML: https://anticdent.org/tc-report-18-12.html

This week's TC Report goes off in the weeds a bit with the editorial
commentary from yours truly. I had trouble getting started, so had
to push myself through some thinking by writing stuff that at least
for the last few weeks I wouldn't normally be including in the
summaries. After getting through it, I realized that the reason I
was struggling is because I haven't been including these sorts of
things. Including them results in a longer and more meandering report
but it is more authentically my experience, which was my original
intention.

# Zuul Extraction and the Difficult Nature of Communication

Last [Tuesday
Morning](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-13.log.html#t2018-03-13T17:22:38)
we had some initial discussion about Zuul being extracted from
OpenStack governance as a precursor to becoming part of the CI/CD
strategic area being born elsewhere in the OpenStack Foundation.

Then on 
[Thursday](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-15.log.html#t2018-03-15T15:08:06)
we revisited the topic, especially as it related to how we
communicate change in the community and how we invite participation
in making decisions about change. In this case by "community" we're
talking about anything under the giant umbrella of "stuff associated
with the OpenStack Foundation".

Plenty of people expressed that though they were not surprised by
the change, it was because they are insiders and could understand
how some, who are not, might be surprised by what seemed like a big
change. This led to addressing the immediate shortcomings and
clarifying the history of the event.

There was also
[concern](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-15.log.html#t2018-03-15T15:27:22)
that some of the reluctance to talk openly about the change appeared
to stem from needing to preserve the potency of a Foundation marketing
release.

I [expressed some
frustration](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-15.log.html#t2018-03-15T15:36:50):
"...as usual, we're getting caught up in
details of a particular event (one that in the end we're all happy
to see happen), rather than the general problem we saw with it
(early transparency etc). Solving the immediate problem is easy, but
since we _keep doing it_, we've got a general issues to resolve."

We went round and round about the various ways in which we have tried
and failed to do good communication in the past, and while we make
some progress, we fail to establish a pattern. As Doug [pointed
out](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-15.log.html#t2018-03-15T15:41:33),
no method can be 100% successful, but if we pick a method and stick to
it, people can learn that method.

We have a cycle where we not only sometimes communicate poorly but
we also communicate poorly about that poor communication. So when I
come round to another week of writing this report, and am reminded
that these issues persist and I am once again communicating about
them, it's frustrating. Communicating, a lot, is generally a good
thing, but if things don't change as a result, that can be a strain.
If I'm still writing these things in a year's time, and we haven't
managed to achieve at least a bit more grace, consistency, and
transparency in the ways that we share information within and
between groups (including, and maybe especially, the Foundation
executive wing) in the wider community, it will be a shame and I will
have a sad.

In a somewhat related and good sign, there is [great
thread](http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/2018-March/014994.html)
on the operators list that raises the potential of merging the Ops
Meeting and the PTG into some kind of "OpenStack Community Working
Gathering".

# Encouraging Upstream Contribution

On
[Friday](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-16.log.html#t2018-03-16T14:29:21),
tbarron raised some interesting questions about how the summit talk
selection process might relate to the [four
opens](https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/opens.html).  The
talk eventually led to a positive plan to try bring some potential
contributors upstream in advance of summit as, well as to work to
create more clear guidelines for track chairs.

# Executive Power

I had a question at [this morning's office
hour](http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2018-03-20.log.html#t2018-03-20T09:00:00),
related to some work in the API-SIG that hasn't had a lot of traction,
about how best to explain how executive power is gained and spent
in a community where we intentionally spread power around a lot. As
with communication above, this is a topic that comes up a fair
amount, and investigating the underlying patterns can be
instructive.

My initial reaction on the topic