Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Sean Dague]

On 10/07/2015 06:22 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
> On 10/07/2015 09:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> On 10/07/2015 08:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>> Sean Dague wrote:
 We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
 getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.

 As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
 should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
 planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
 there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
 names that turn out to be confusing later.
>>>
>>> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently
>>> states[1]:
>>>
>>> """
>>> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of
>>> the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner
>>> than the opening of development of the previous release.
>>> """
>>>
>>> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
>>> might want to change that (again) first.
>>>
>>> [1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html
>>
>> Right, it seems like we should change it so that we can do naming as
>> soon as the location is announced.
>>
>> For projects like Nova that are trying to plan things more than one
>> cycle out, having those names to hang those features on is massively
>> useful (as danpb also stated). Delaying for bureaucratic reasons just
>> seems silly. :)
> 
> So, for what it's worth, I remember discussing this when we discussed
> the current process, and the change you are proposing was one of the
> options put forward when we talked about it.
> 
> The reason for not doing all of them as soon as we know them was to keep
> a sense of ownership by the people who are actually working on the
> thing. Barcelona is a long way away and we'll all likely have rage quit
> by then, leaving the electorate for the name largely disjoint from the
> people working on the release.
> 
> Now, I hear you - and I'm not arguing that position. (In fact, I believe
> my original thought was in line with what you said here) BUT - I mostly
> want to point out that we have had this discussion, the discussion was
> not too long ago, it covered this point, and I sort of feel like if we
> have another discussion on naming process people might kill us with
> pitchforks.

That's fine. But I also think baking in an assumption that everyone will
rage quit in 2 cycles, so we shouldn't name it, seems massively
pessimistic.

I'll admit that I tuned out a bit in the last conversation because most
of the things people were arguing passionately about were things I felt
ambivalent towards. The thing I mostly care about is getting labels on
things past the next quarter so that we can reinforce that planning for
OpenStack projects isn't just about the next release, but includes big
efforts that span multiple releases.

Ok, I guess I'll propose the change, and that we start these activities
soon for the next TC meeting. And whoever the next TC class is can
address it.

-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:57:59PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Sean Dague wrote:
> > We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
> > getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
> > 
> > As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
> > should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
> > planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
> > there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
> > names that turn out to be confusing later.
> 
> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently states[1]:
> 
> """
> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of
> the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner
> than the opening of development of the previous release.
> """
> 
> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
> might want to change that (again) first.

Since changing the naming process may take non-negligible time, could
we parallelize, so we can at least press ahead with picking a name for
N asap which is permitted by current rules.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com  -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org  -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org   -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org   -o-   http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Sean Dague]

On 10/08/2015 06:59 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:57:59PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>> Sean Dague wrote:
>>> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
>>> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
>>>
>>> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
>>> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
>>> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
>>> there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
>>> names that turn out to be confusing later.
>>
>> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently states[1]:
>>
>> """
>> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of
>> the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner
>> than the opening of development of the previous release.
>> """
>>
>> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
>> might want to change that (again) first.
> 
> Since changing the naming process may take non-negligible time, could
> we parallelize, so we can at least press ahead with picking a name for
> N asap which is permitted by current rules.

Agreed. I believe that Monty and Jim signed up for shepherding this
after the last naming rules change. I've added it to the TC agenda for
next week to kickstart the process.

-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Barrett, Carol L]

Monty - Thanks for the background, it brings a viewpoint I hadn't considered.

>From a roadmap point of view, as we're working toward communicating the 
>direction for OpenStack project development across 3 releases (Liberty, 
>Mitake, N-Release), I think it would better to have a name for N, rather than 
>using N-Release.  

Thanks
Carol

-Original Message-
From: Monty Taylor [mailto:mord...@inaugust.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:22 PM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

On 10/07/2015 09:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 10/07/2015 08:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>> Sean Dague wrote:
>>> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are 
>>> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
>>>
>>> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we 
>>> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this 
>>> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem 
>>> like there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with 
>>> working names that turn out to be confusing later.
>>
>> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently states[1]:
>>
>> """
>> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location 
>> of the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no 
>> sooner than the opening of development of the previous release.
>> """
>>
>> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. 
>> We might want to change that (again) first.
>>
>> [1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html
>
> Right, it seems like we should change it so that we can do naming as 
> soon as the location is announced.
>
> For projects like Nova that are trying to plan things more than one 
> cycle out, having those names to hang those features on is massively 
> useful (as danpb also stated). Delaying for bureaucratic reasons just 
> seems silly. :)

So, for what it's worth, I remember discussing this when we discussed the 
current process, and the change you are proposing was one of the options put 
forward when we talked about it.

The reason for not doing all of them as soon as we know them was to keep a 
sense of ownership by the people who are actually working on the thing. 
Barcelona is a long way away and we'll all likely have rage quit by then, 
leaving the electorate for the name largely disjoint from the people working on 
the release.

Now, I hear you - and I'm not arguing that position. (In fact, I believe my 
original thought was in line with what you said here) BUT - I mostly want to 
point out that we have had this discussion, the discussion was not too long 
ago, it covered this point, and I sort of feel like if we have another 
discussion on naming process people might kill us with pitchforks.

Monty


__
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 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Robert Collins]

On 9 October 2015 at 00:53, Sean Dague  wrote:
> On 10/08/2015 06:59 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:57:59PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>> Sean Dague wrote:
 We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
 getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.

 As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
 should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
 planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
 there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
 names that turn out to be confusing later.
>>>
>>> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently states[1]:
>>>
>>> """
>>> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of
>>> the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner
>>> than the opening of development of the previous release.
>>> """
>>>
>>> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
>>> might want to change that (again) first.
>>
>> Since changing the naming process may take non-negligible time, could
>> we parallelize, so we can at least press ahead with picking a name for
>> N asap which is permitted by current rules.
>
> Agreed. I believe that Monty and Jim signed up for shepherding this
> after the last naming rules change. I've added it to the TC agenda for
> next week to kickstart the process.

FWIW I don't think 2.5K developers are going to disappear without some
other major problems that will be much more pressing than the name we
chose :)

I'm +1 on picking once the venue is settled [or perhaps further out
but thats a different discussion].

-Rob

-- 
Robert Collins 
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Monty Taylor]

On 10/07/2015 09:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote:

On 10/07/2015 08:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:

Sean Dague wrote:

We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.

As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
names that turn out to be confusing later.


That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently states[1]:

"""
The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of
the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner
than the opening of development of the previous release.
"""

...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
might want to change that (again) first.

[1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html


Right, it seems like we should change it so that we can do naming as
soon as the location is announced.

For projects like Nova that are trying to plan things more than one
cycle out, having those names to hang those features on is massively
useful (as danpb also stated). Delaying for bureaucratic reasons just
seems silly. :)


So, for what it's worth, I remember discussing this when we discussed 
the current process, and the change you are proposing was one of the 
options put forward when we talked about it.


The reason for not doing all of them as soon as we know them was to keep 
a sense of ownership by the people who are actually working on the 
thing. Barcelona is a long way away and we'll all likely have rage quit 
by then, leaving the electorate for the name largely disjoint from the 
people working on the release.


Now, I hear you - and I'm not arguing that position. (In fact, I believe 
my original thought was in line with what you said here) BUT - I mostly 
want to point out that we have had this discussion, the discussion was 
not too long ago, it covered this point, and I sort of feel like if we 
have another discussion on naming process people might kill us with 
pitchforks.


Monty


__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Matthias Runge]

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 03:02:47PM +0200, Christian Berendt wrote:
> Is this list correct?
> 
> M = Tokyo
> N = Atlanta
> O = Barcelona
> P = ?

IIRC N should be Austin instead of Atlanta.
-- 
Matthias Runge 

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Anita Kuno]

On 10/07/2015 06:22 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
> On 10/07/2015 09:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> On 10/07/2015 08:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
>>> Sean Dague wrote:
 We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
 getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.

 As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
 should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
 planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
 there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
 names that turn out to be confusing later.
>>>
>>> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently
>>> states[1]:
>>>
>>> """
>>> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of
>>> the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner
>>> than the opening of development of the previous release.
>>> """
>>>
>>> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
>>> might want to change that (again) first.
>>>
>>> [1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html
>>
>> Right, it seems like we should change it so that we can do naming as
>> soon as the location is announced.
>>
>> For projects like Nova that are trying to plan things more than one
>> cycle out, having those names to hang those features on is massively
>> useful (as danpb also stated). Delaying for bureaucratic reasons just
>> seems silly. :)
> 
> So, for what it's worth, I remember discussing this when we discussed
> the current process, and the change you are proposing was one of the
> options put forward when we talked about it.
> 
> The reason for not doing all of them as soon as we know them was to keep
> a sense of ownership by the people who are actually working on the
> thing. Barcelona is a long way away and we'll all likely have rage quit
> by then, leaving the electorate for the name largely disjoint from the
> people working on the release.
> 
> Now, I hear you - and I'm not arguing that position. (In fact, I believe
> my original thought was in line with what you said here) BUT - I mostly
> want to point out that we have had this discussion, the discussion was
> not too long ago, it covered this point, and I sort of feel like if we
> have another discussion on naming process people might kill us with
> pitchforks.

You are assuming that not having this conversation might shield you from
the pitchforks.

Anita.

> 
> Monty
> 
> 
> __
> 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 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Rochelle Grober]

> -Original Message-
> From: Anita Kuno [mailto:ante...@anteaya.info]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:48 PM
> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish
> 
> On 10/07/2015 06:22 PM, Monty Taylor wrote:
> > On 10/07/2015 09:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
> >> On 10/07/2015 08:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> >>> Sean Dague wrote:
> >>>> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans
> are
> >>>> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
> >>>>
> >>>> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think
> we
> >>>> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
> >>>> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem
> like
> >>>> there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with
> working
> >>>> names that turn out to be confusing later.
> >>>
> >>> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently
> >>> states[1]:
> >>>
> >>> """
> >>> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the
> location of
> >>> the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no
> sooner
> >>> than the opening of development of the previous release.
> >>> """
> >>>
> >>> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not
> O. We
> >>> might want to change that (again) first.
> >>>
> >>> [1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html
> >>
> >> Right, it seems like we should change it so that we can do naming as
> >> soon as the location is announced.
> >>
> >> For projects like Nova that are trying to plan things more than one
> >> cycle out, having those names to hang those features on is massively
> >> useful (as danpb also stated). Delaying for bureaucratic reasons
> just
> >> seems silly. :)
> >
> > So, for what it's worth, I remember discussing this when we discussed
> > the current process, and the change you are proposing was one of the
> > options put forward when we talked about it.
> >
> > The reason for not doing all of them as soon as we know them was to
> keep
> > a sense of ownership by the people who are actually working on the
> > thing. Barcelona is a long way away and we'll all likely have rage
> quit
> > by then, leaving the electorate for the name largely disjoint from
> the
> > people working on the release.
> >
> > Now, I hear you - and I'm not arguing that position. (In fact, I
> believe
> > my original thought was in line with what you said here) BUT - I
> mostly
> > want to point out that we have had this discussion, the discussion
> was
> > not too long ago, it covered this point, and I sort of feel like if
> we
> > have another discussion on naming process people might kill us with
> > pitchforks.
> 
> You are assuming that not having this conversation might shield you
> from
> the pitchforks.
 
I, myself favor war hammers (very useful tool for separating plaster from 
lathe), but if we all rage quit, the new guard can always change the name as a 
middle finger salute to the old guard.  Let's be daring!  Let's name O, too!

--Rocky

> Anita.
> 
> >
> > Monty
> >
> >
> >
> ___
> ___
> > 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 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 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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Flavio Percoco]

On 07/10/15 07:47 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:

We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.

As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
names that turn out to be confusing later.


Unless there's a good reason for not doing this, I'm ok with the
above.

Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
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] naming N and O releases nowish

[Sean Dague]

We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.

As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
names that turn out to be confusing later.

-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Ed Leafe]

On Oct 7, 2015, at 6:47 AM, Sean Dague  wrote:

> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
> 
> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
> there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
> names that turn out to be confusing later.

That makes sense, and it also has the advantage that it might give sufficient 
time to weed out undesirable names, such as what happened with the M naming 
process.


-- Ed Leafe







signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Christian Berendt]

On 10/07/2015 02:57 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
> might want to change that (again) first.

Is this list correct?

M = Tokyo
N = Atlanta
O = Barcelona
P = ?

Christian.

-- 
Christian Berendt
Cloud Solution Architect
Mail: bere...@b1-systems.de

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Flavio Percoco]

On 07/10/15 15:02 +0200, Christian Berendt wrote:

On 10/07/2015 02:57 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:

...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
might want to change that (again) first.


Is this list correct?

M = Tokyo
N = Atlanta


Austin, Texas.


O = Barcelona
P = ?

Christian.

--
Christian Berendt
Cloud Solution Architect
Mail: bere...@b1-systems.de

B1 Systems GmbH
Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de
GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537

__
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


--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Daniel P. Berrange]

On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 07:47:31AM -0400, Sean Dague wrote:
> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
> 
> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
> there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
> names that turn out to be confusing later.

Yep, it would be nice to have names decided further in advance than
we have done in the past. It saves having to refer to N, O
all the time, or having people invent their own temporary names like
Lemming and Muppet...

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: http://berrange.com  -o-http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org  -o- http://virt-manager.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org   -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: http://entangle-photo.org   -o-   http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Thierry Carrez]

Sean Dague wrote:
> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
> 
> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
> there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
> names that turn out to be confusing later.

That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently states[1]:

"""
The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of
the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner
than the opening of development of the previous release.
"""

...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
might want to change that (again) first.

[1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Sean Dague]

On 10/07/2015 08:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Sean Dague wrote:
>> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are
>> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
>>
>> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we
>> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this
>> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like
>> there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working
>> names that turn out to be confusing later.
> 
> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently states[1]:
> 
> """
> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of
> the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner
> than the opening of development of the previous release.
> """
> 
> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We
> might want to change that (again) first.
> 
> [1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html

Right, it seems like we should change it so that we can do naming as
soon as the location is announced.

For projects like Nova that are trying to plan things more than one
cycle out, having those names to hang those features on is massively
useful (as danpb also stated). Delaying for bureaucratic reasons just
seems silly. :)

-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

[Barrett, Carol L]

Is there any reason we can't change that process to align with the longer term 
planning that's happening around these things? 
Thanks
Carol
-Original Message-
From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thie...@openstack.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 5:58 AM
To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish

Sean Dague wrote:
> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are 
> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles.
> 
> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we 
> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this 
> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem 
> like there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with 
> working names that turn out to be confusing later.

That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently states[1]:

"""
The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of the 
design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner than the 
opening of development of the previous release.
"""

...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We might 
want to change that (again) first.

[1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

__
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 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