I'm not fully recovered from summit yet, so this will not cover
everything. It will pick back up next week once I'm back in the
full flow.
# Notes from Summit
Elsewhere I'll create a more complete write up of the Foundation board
meeting that happened on the Sunday before summit, but some comments
from that feel relevant to the purpose of these reports:
When new people were being introduced around the table, TC members
did not include their company affiliations, board members did. This
is good.
Repeated (but not frequent) theme of different members of the board
expressing a need for requirements to be given t the TC to give to
"the devs", sometimes via the product working grop. Sometimes this
felt a bit like "someone please give the devs a kick".
At the same time new board members were accepted wthout the new
members giving concrete statements about how many resources (human
or hardware) they were going to promise "upstream".
Cultural barriers to engagement for new participants is a huge deal.
Lots of employees at lots of companies do not have an easy way to
grok open source in general or the OpenStack way.
It's a complicated situation resolution of which likely requires
greater communication between the TC, the UC (and related working
groups) and the Board, but as usual, many people are over-tasked.
# Meeting Minutes
Log:
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2017/tc.2017-05-16-20.01.log.html
## Summit Followup
Some discussion on expanding the breadth of Forum sessions beyond
three at a time. Most people did not want to expand as double booking
can be a significant problem.
Some people (notably mriedem, nova PTL) said that the sessions
seemed too dev-centric and did not provide as much user and ops
feedback as was hoped. That is: the number of users and operators
present was not greatly increased and the set of users and operators
who spoke were the usual suspects.
Forum attendees felt obliged to be in forum rooms so missed out on
opportunities to witness conference presentations and see what the
real world is up to. This is unfortunate because, well, it's the
real world where real stuff is happening.
But, in general, it felt like good improvement. For next time:
* recording the on-boarding sessions
* improving (making more visible) last minute scheduling of un-used
rooms
* greater preparation/agenda-making for some sessions
## Next Steps TC Vision
https://review.openstack.org/453262
There was a feedback session at summit regarding the vision:
https://www.openstack.org/videos/boston-2017/the-openstack-technical-committee-vision-for-2019-updates-stories-and-q-and-a
The feedback from that needs to be integrated with the feedback from
the recent survey, digested, and a new version of the review
created. Apparently a lot of people at the summit session weren't
aware of it, which says something about the info flow.
## Deprecating postgresql in OpenStack
https://review.openstack.org/427880
This is a move to document that postgresql is not actively tested in
the gate nor considered a good choice for deployment.
Since this is my opinionated view of events: I don't think this is
the right approach (because it is effectively changing a deployed
API and we don't allow that other places), but there are many
legitimate reasons for the described approach, mostly to do with not
misleading people about the degree of support that upstream
OpenStack is providing for postgresql.
## Document voting process for formal-vote
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/463141/
With the change to be more mailing list oriented, changes are
needed to the TC voting process to make sure that resolutions are
visible to everyone and have sufficient time for review. This turns
out to be more complicated than it might initially sound: some
votes? all votes? count by business days or absolute days?
# Thoughts from the Meeting and Summit
It felt like we spent a lot of the meeting expressing strategies for
how to constrain options and actions in reaction to unavailable
resources, and not enough time on considering strategies for gaining
more resources. This while the board is expressing a relatively
healthy budget and welcoming one new platinum and two new gold
members and not being fully cognizant of how OpenStack development
really works. The TC needs to be more active in expressing the needs
of the technical community to the board that represents the
companies that provides many resources. It's a two way street.
The TC is currently doing a lot of work to improve its process:
potentially killing meetings, changing how pending resolutions are
communicated to the community. This is important stuff because it
will eventually help to increase participation and diversity of
participants, but presumably it needs to be alongside ensuring that
we (as an entire community) are making good stuff in a sustainable
fashion. Only a very small amount of the discussion at today's TC
meeting or at least week's board meeting
