Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-03-08 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 18/02/15 10:07 -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote:



On Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 05:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 09:29:19AM -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
 Excerpts from Daniel P. Berrange's message of 2015-02-17 02:37:50 -0800:
  On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:14:39PM +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
## Cores are *NOT* special
   
At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
  
   This is seriously disturbing.
  
   If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
   please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
   a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
  
   No public shaming, please: education first.
 
  I've been thinking about these last few lines a bit, I'm not entirely
  comfortable with the dynamic this sets up.
 
  What primarily concerns me is the issue of community accountability. A core
  feature of OpenStack's project  individual team governance is the idea
  of democractic elections, where the individual contributors can vote in
  people who they think will lead OpenStack in a positive way, or conversely
  hold leadership to account by voting them out next time. The ability of
  individuals contributors to exercise this freedom though, relies on the
  voters being well informed about what is happening in the community.
 
  If cases of bad community behaviour, such as use of passwd protected IRC
  channels, are always primarily dealt with via further private 
communications,
  then we are denying the voters the information they need to hold people to
  account. I can understand the desire to avoid publically shaming people
  right away, because the accusations may be false, or may be arising from a
  simple mis-understanding, but at some point genuine issues like this need
  to be public. Without this we make it difficult for contributors to make
  an informed decision at future elections.
 
  Right now, this thread has left me wondering whether there are still any
  projects which are using password protected IRC channels, or whether they
  have all been deleted, and whether I will be unwittingly voting for people
  who supported their use in future openstack elections.
 

 Shaming a person is a last resort, when that person may not listen to
 reason. It's sometimes necessary to bring shame to a practice, but even
 then, those who are participating are now draped in shame as well and
 will have a hard time saving face.

This really isn't about trying to shame people, rather it is about
having accountability in the open.

If the accusations of running private IRC channels were false, then
yes, it would be an example of shaming to then publicise those who
were accused.

Since it is confirmed that private password protected IRC channels
do in fact exist, then we need to have the explanations as to why
this was done be made in public. The community can then decide
whether the explanations offered provide sufficient justification.
This isn't about shaming, it is about each individual being able
to decide for themselves as to whether what happened was acceptable,
given the explanations.


Right. And Stef is pulling that information together from the
appropriate sources. Sometimes it's easier to have those sorts of
conversations one-on-one than in a fully public forum. When we have the
full picture, then will know whether further action is needed (I hope
the team decides to close down the channel on their own, for example).
In any case, we will publish the facts. But let's give Stef time to work
on it, first.


Hi All,

I'm pretty sure this was discussed already in a TC meeting, which I
did not attend unfortunately. In the spite of keeoing things open -
not only the issues but also the solutions found - would someone from
the TC (or Stefano) mind highlighting what the resolution for this
issue is?

I don't think there's a great solution for the per-project
organizational issues other than recommending people to work in the
open and having the community fighting for it. However, I do expect
there to be a solution for the secret channel, which by the way still
exists.

Thank you all for participating in this discussion,
Flavio



Doug



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:

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-03-08 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-03-08 08:20:31 -0430 (-0430), Flavio Percoco wrote:
 I'm pretty sure this was discussed already in a TC meeting, which
 I did not attend unfortunately. In the spite of keeoing things
 open - not only the issues but also the solutions found - would
 someone from the TC (or Stefano) mind highlighting what the
 resolution for this issue is?
[...]

http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/tc/2015/tc.2015-02-24-20.02.log.html#l-107

https://review.openstack.org/159930

-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-18 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 09:29:19AM -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
 Excerpts from Daniel P. Berrange's message of 2015-02-17 02:37:50 -0800:
  On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:14:39PM +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
## Cores are *NOT* special

At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
   
   This is seriously disturbing.
   
   If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
   please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
   a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
   
   No public shaming, please: education first.
  
  I've been thinking about these last few lines a bit, I'm not entirely
  comfortable with the dynamic this sets up.
  
  What primarily concerns me is the issue of community accountability. A core
  feature of OpenStack's project  individual team governance is the idea
  of democractic elections, where the individual contributors can vote in
  people who they think will lead OpenStack in a positive way, or conversely
  hold leadership to account by voting them out next time. The ability of
  individuals contributors to exercise this freedom though, relies on the
  voters being well informed about what is happening in the community.
  
  If cases of bad community behaviour, such as use of passwd protected IRC
  channels, are always primarily dealt with via further private 
  communications,
  then we are denying the voters the information they need to hold people to
  account. I can understand the desire to avoid publically shaming people
  right away, because the accusations may be false, or may be arising from a
  simple mis-understanding, but at some point genuine issues like this need
  to be public. Without this we make it difficult for contributors to make
  an informed decision at future elections.
  
  Right now, this thread has left me wondering whether there are still any
  projects which are using password protected IRC channels, or whether they
  have all been deleted, and whether I will be unwittingly voting for people
  who supported their use in future openstack elections.
  
 
 Shaming a person is a last resort, when that person may not listen to
 reason. It's sometimes necessary to bring shame to a practice, but even
 then, those who are participating are now draped in shame as well and
 will have a hard time saving face.

This really isn't about trying to shame people, rather it is about
having accountability in the open.

If the accusations of running private IRC channels were false, then
yes, it would be an example of shaming to then publicise those who
were accused.

Since it is confirmed that private password protected IRC channels
do in fact exist, then we need to have the explanations as to why
this was done be made in public. The community can then decide
whether the explanations offered provide sufficient justification.
This isn't about shaming, it is about each individual being able
to decide for themselves as to whether what happened was acceptable,
given the explanations.

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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-18 Thread Doug Hellmann


On Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 05:40 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
 On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 09:29:19AM -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
  Excerpts from Daniel P. Berrange's message of 2015-02-17 02:37:50 -0800:
   On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:14:39PM +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
 ## Cores are *NOT* special
 
 At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
 changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
 a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
 that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
 protected, irc channels for core reviewers.

This is seriously disturbing.

If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.

No public shaming, please: education first.
   
   I've been thinking about these last few lines a bit, I'm not entirely
   comfortable with the dynamic this sets up.
   
   What primarily concerns me is the issue of community accountability. A 
   core
   feature of OpenStack's project  individual team governance is the idea
   of democractic elections, where the individual contributors can vote in
   people who they think will lead OpenStack in a positive way, or conversely
   hold leadership to account by voting them out next time. The ability of
   individuals contributors to exercise this freedom though, relies on the
   voters being well informed about what is happening in the community.
   
   If cases of bad community behaviour, such as use of passwd protected IRC
   channels, are always primarily dealt with via further private 
   communications,
   then we are denying the voters the information they need to hold people to
   account. I can understand the desire to avoid publically shaming people
   right away, because the accusations may be false, or may be arising from a
   simple mis-understanding, but at some point genuine issues like this need
   to be public. Without this we make it difficult for contributors to make
   an informed decision at future elections.
   
   Right now, this thread has left me wondering whether there are still any
   projects which are using password protected IRC channels, or whether they
   have all been deleted, and whether I will be unwittingly voting for people
   who supported their use in future openstack elections.
   
  
  Shaming a person is a last resort, when that person may not listen to
  reason. It's sometimes necessary to bring shame to a practice, but even
  then, those who are participating are now draped in shame as well and
  will have a hard time saving face.
 
 This really isn't about trying to shame people, rather it is about
 having accountability in the open.
 
 If the accusations of running private IRC channels were false, then
 yes, it would be an example of shaming to then publicise those who
 were accused.
 
 Since it is confirmed that private password protected IRC channels
 do in fact exist, then we need to have the explanations as to why
 this was done be made in public. The community can then decide
 whether the explanations offered provide sufficient justification.
 This isn't about shaming, it is about each individual being able
 to decide for themselves as to whether what happened was acceptable,
 given the explanations.

Right. And Stef is pulling that information together from the
appropriate sources. Sometimes it's easier to have those sorts of
conversations one-on-one than in a fully public forum. When we have the
full picture, then will know whether further action is needed (I hope
the team decides to close down the channel on their own, for example).
In any case, we will publish the facts. But let's give Stef time to work
on it, first.

Doug

 
 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

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-17 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 17/02/15 10:44 -0500, Doug Hellmann wrote:



On Tue, Feb 17, 2015, at 05:37 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:

On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:14:39PM +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
  ## Cores are *NOT* special
 
  At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
  changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
  a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
  that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
  protected, irc channels for core reviewers.

 This is seriously disturbing.

 If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
 please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
 a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.

 No public shaming, please: education first.

I've been thinking about these last few lines a bit, I'm not entirely
comfortable with the dynamic this sets up.

What primarily concerns me is the issue of community accountability. A
core
feature of OpenStack's project  individual team governance is the idea
of democractic elections, where the individual contributors can vote in
people who they think will lead OpenStack in a positive way, or
conversely
hold leadership to account by voting them out next time. The ability of
individuals contributors to exercise this freedom though, relies on the
voters being well informed about what is happening in the community.

If cases of bad community behaviour, such as use of passwd protected IRC
channels, are always primarily dealt with via further private
communications,
then we are denying the voters the information they need to hold people
to
account. I can understand the desire to avoid publically shaming people
right away, because the accusations may be false, or may be arising from
a
simple mis-understanding, but at some point genuine issues like this need
to be public. Without this we make it difficult for contributors to make
an informed decision at future elections.

Right now, this thread has left me wondering whether there are still any
projects which are using password protected IRC channels, or whether they
have all been deleted, and whether I will be unwittingly voting for
people
who supported their use in future openstack elections.


I trust Stef, as one of our Community Managers, to investigate and
report back. Let's give that a little time, and allow for the fact that
with travel and other things going on it may take a while. I've added it
to the TC agenda [1] for next week so we can check in to see where
things stand.

Doug

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda



Thanks!

FWIW, I'm share Dan's concerns with regards to generating community
awareness on what's considered a violation of openness not being
enough. The issues discussed in this thread have a broader impact than
just openness.

Also, the channel still exists, despite dropping it being so simple:

   /msg chanserv drop #your-super-secret-channel

But even if that drop happens in the next couple of minutes, I'd
really love for us to find a better way to generate more awareness on
these topics. The whole problem goes even beyond that channel existing
now but the fact that it's been around for 1 year.

This thread also meantioned other things that violate our openness.
For instance:

 - Closed phone calls considered the place for making *final*
   decisions
 - Closed planning tools with restricted access. Nothing bad about
   using external tools as far as they remain OPEN.
 - Assuming 1 medium is the right tool for everything without
   taking under consideration other aspects of our community (TZ,
   language, etc).

Again, thanks for making this point a priority for the TC as well,
looking forward to the next TC meeting, I'll try to be there.

Cheers,
Flavio



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


__
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


pgpWOvxKuDDsl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-17 Thread Doug Hellmann


On Tue, Feb 17, 2015, at 05:37 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
 On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:14:39PM +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
   ## Cores are *NOT* special
   
   At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
   changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
   a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
   that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
   protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
  
  This is seriously disturbing.
  
  If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
  please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
  a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
  
  No public shaming, please: education first.
 
 I've been thinking about these last few lines a bit, I'm not entirely
 comfortable with the dynamic this sets up.
 
 What primarily concerns me is the issue of community accountability. A
 core
 feature of OpenStack's project  individual team governance is the idea
 of democractic elections, where the individual contributors can vote in
 people who they think will lead OpenStack in a positive way, or
 conversely
 hold leadership to account by voting them out next time. The ability of
 individuals contributors to exercise this freedom though, relies on the
 voters being well informed about what is happening in the community.
 
 If cases of bad community behaviour, such as use of passwd protected IRC
 channels, are always primarily dealt with via further private
 communications,
 then we are denying the voters the information they need to hold people
 to
 account. I can understand the desire to avoid publically shaming people
 right away, because the accusations may be false, or may be arising from
 a
 simple mis-understanding, but at some point genuine issues like this need
 to be public. Without this we make it difficult for contributors to make
 an informed decision at future elections.
 
 Right now, this thread has left me wondering whether there are still any
 projects which are using password protected IRC channels, or whether they
 have all been deleted, and whether I will be unwittingly voting for
 people
 who supported their use in future openstack elections.

I trust Stef, as one of our Community Managers, to investigate and
report back. Let's give that a little time, and allow for the fact that
with travel and other things going on it may take a while. I've added it
to the TC agenda [1] for next week so we can check in to see where
things stand.

Doug

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee#Agenda

 
 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

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-17 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Daniel P. Berrange's message of 2015-02-17 02:37:50 -0800:
 On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:14:39PM +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
   ## Cores are *NOT* special
   
   At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
   changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
   a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
   that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
   protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
  
  This is seriously disturbing.
  
  If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
  please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
  a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
  
  No public shaming, please: education first.
 
 I've been thinking about these last few lines a bit, I'm not entirely
 comfortable with the dynamic this sets up.
 
 What primarily concerns me is the issue of community accountability. A core
 feature of OpenStack's project  individual team governance is the idea
 of democractic elections, where the individual contributors can vote in
 people who they think will lead OpenStack in a positive way, or conversely
 hold leadership to account by voting them out next time. The ability of
 individuals contributors to exercise this freedom though, relies on the
 voters being well informed about what is happening in the community.
 
 If cases of bad community behaviour, such as use of passwd protected IRC
 channels, are always primarily dealt with via further private communications,
 then we are denying the voters the information they need to hold people to
 account. I can understand the desire to avoid publically shaming people
 right away, because the accusations may be false, or may be arising from a
 simple mis-understanding, but at some point genuine issues like this need
 to be public. Without this we make it difficult for contributors to make
 an informed decision at future elections.
 
 Right now, this thread has left me wondering whether there are still any
 projects which are using password protected IRC channels, or whether they
 have all been deleted, and whether I will be unwittingly voting for people
 who supported their use in future openstack elections.
 

Shaming a person is a last resort, when that person may not listen to
reason. It's sometimes necessary to bring shame to a practice, but even
then, those who are participating are now draped in shame as well and
will have a hard time saving face.

However, if we show respect to peoples' ideas, and take the time not
only to educate them on our values, but also to educate ourselves about
what motivates that practice, then I think we will have a much easier
time changing, or even accepting, these behaviors.

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-17 Thread Ed Leafe
On Feb 17, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:

 Shaming a person is a last resort, when that person may not listen to
 reason. It's sometimes necessary to bring shame to a practice, but even
 then, those who are participating are now draped in shame as well and
 will have a hard time saving face.

Why must pointing out that someone is doing something incorrectly necessarily 
shaming? Those of us who review code do that all the time; telling someone 
that there is a better way to code something is certainly not shaming, since we 
all benefit from those suggestions.

Sure, you can also be a jerk about how you tell someone they can improve, but 
that's certainly not the norm in this community.


-- 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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-17 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Ed Leafe's message of 2015-02-17 10:11:01 -0800:
 On Feb 17, 2015, at 11:29 AM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:
 
  Shaming a person is a last resort, when that person may not listen to
  reason. It's sometimes necessary to bring shame to a practice, but even
  then, those who are participating are now draped in shame as well and
  will have a hard time saving face.
 
 Why must pointing out that someone is doing something incorrectly necessarily 
 shaming? Those of us who review code do that all the time; telling someone 
 that there is a better way to code something is certainly not shaming, since 
 we all benefit from those suggestions.
 

Funny you should bring that up, that may be an entirely new branch of this
thread which is how harmful some of our review practices are to overall
community harmony. I definitely think there's a small amount of unhealthy
shaming in reviews, and a not small amount of non-constructive criticism.

Saying This code is not covered by tests. or You could make this less
complex by using a generator. is constructive criticism that has as
little shaming effect as possible without beating around the bush. This
is the very definition of _educating_.

However, being entirely subjective and attacking stylistic issues
(please know that I'm not claiming innocence at all here) does damage to
the relationship between coder and review team. Of course, a discussion
of style has a place, but I believe that place is in a private
conversation, not out in the open where it will almost certainly bring
shame to the submitter.

 Sure, you can also be a jerk about how you tell someone they can improve, but 
 that's certainly not the norm in this community.
 

I agree that the subjective stylistic nit picking comes in a polite way.
I think that only softens the blow to someone's ego and still conveys a
level of disrespect that will eventually erode the level of trust
between the submitter and the project as a whole.

So, somewhat ironically, I think the right place to make subjective
observations about someone's work is in a private message.

Unfortunately, I think humans are quite subjective themselves, and so
what might be too harsh and shameful to one ego, might be just the right
thing to educate the next. Calibration of one's criticism practices is
one of those things I'm sure most of us geeks would like to think we
don't have to worry about. However, I think it is worthwhile to consider
it before making any critique, especially when one doesn't know the
recipient of the critique extremely well.

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-17 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 03:14:39PM +0100, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
  ## Cores are *NOT* special
  
  At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
  changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
  a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
  that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
  protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
 
 This is seriously disturbing.
 
 If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
 please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
 a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
 
 No public shaming, please: education first.

I've been thinking about these last few lines a bit, I'm not entirely
comfortable with the dynamic this sets up.

What primarily concerns me is the issue of community accountability. A core
feature of OpenStack's project  individual team governance is the idea
of democractic elections, where the individual contributors can vote in
people who they think will lead OpenStack in a positive way, or conversely
hold leadership to account by voting them out next time. The ability of
individuals contributors to exercise this freedom though, relies on the
voters being well informed about what is happening in the community.

If cases of bad community behaviour, such as use of passwd protected IRC
channels, are always primarily dealt with via further private communications,
then we are denying the voters the information they need to hold people to
account. I can understand the desire to avoid publically shaming people
right away, because the accusations may be false, or may be arising from a
simple mis-understanding, but at some point genuine issues like this need
to be public. Without this we make it difficult for contributors to make
an informed decision at future elections.

Right now, this thread has left me wondering whether there are still any
projects which are using password protected IRC channels, or whether they
have all been deleted, and whether I will be unwittingly voting for people
who supported their use in future openstack elections.

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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-13 Thread Thierry Carrez
Stefano Maffulli wrote:
 And so far, no real indication of why IRC is worse than a private
 phone call or a water-cooler conversation on a regular basis. 
 
 Multiple people have explained why already and you're choosing to ignore
 their words: permanent private IRC channels are a bad habit that
 reinforces a bad, anti-social behavior. When people develop the habit of
 hanging out separately from the rest, aristocracies start to emerge.
 That's bad for an open and democratic meritocracy like OpenStack.

Right. The danger of a permanent private channel is that, when one is
readily available, participants will end up having most of their
discussions there. And when they do, it fragments your community between
those with access and those without. We don't have elite committers in
OpenStack, everyone produces code and everyone reviews code. That's a
critical part of how we do development.

The pain of setting up a private channel when necessary to solve
exceptional issues ensures that it stays exceptional. The fact that it's
not permanent makes sure you don't fall into the trap of discussing
something there that should just be discussed on a public channel instead.

Because as I said elsewhere in this thread, it's only human nature, when
you have the choice between a channel where only your friends are, and a
channel where anyone could listen, you'll naturally prefer starting
discussions in the restricted channel. It takes a significant amount of
effort on all participants to just use this convenient and permanent
channel for the exceptional topics that may benefit from extra privacy.
And that effort is getting bigger as long as the channel survives.

-- 
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-13 Thread Kyle Mestery
I was traveling for two days, and I miss a great thread like this. Go
figure! One comment in-line.

On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 3:55 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:

 Greetings all,

 During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
 things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
 to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
 these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
 concerns.

 Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume
 such when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make
 names and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to
 point based on the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll
 mention below know that I'm talking to them.

 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.

 ## Keep discussions open

 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
 discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
 went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
 good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
 don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
 that you had enough consensus.

 Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at
 the very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a
 community of people who *care* about the project they're working on.
 This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
 sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a
 private discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details
 of such discussion and bring that person up to date, which means the
 discussion will basically start again... from scratch.

 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.

 If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
 most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
 mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
 with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
 that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
 list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
 your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*

 Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
 We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
 advantage of it?

 ## Cores are *NOT* special

 At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
 changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
 a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
 that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
 protected, irc channels for core reviewers.

 This is not right and I don't believe core reviewers (note I did not
just say core, but core reviewer) are special in any way. In fact, they are
likely less special because they have a huge responsibility: Reviewing code
in a timely manner and merging changes to close bugs and features! This is
nothing special other than much more additional work. I think more projects
need to do a better job of ensuring their core reviewers are actually
reviewing code, and it's a good idea to in fact cycle core reviewers in and
out more frequently. Otherwise, a sense of entitlement can in fact occur,
and this is where things go bad.


 This is the point where my good faith assumption skill falls short.
 Seriously, don't get me wrong but: WHAT IN THE ACTUAL F**K?

 THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING PRIVATE FOR CORE REVIEWERS* TO
 DISCUSS.

 If anything core reviewers should be the ones *FORCING* - it seems
 that *encouraging* doesn't have the same effect anymore - *OPENNESS* in
 order to include other non-core members in those discussions.

 Remember that the core flag is granted because of the reviews that
 person has provided and because that individual *WANTS* to be part of
 it. It's not a prize for people. In fact, I consider core reviewers to
 be volunteers and their job is infinitely thanked.

 This is a very good point and I agree with it.


 Since, All generalizations are false, including this one. - Mark
 Twain, I'm pretty sure there are folks that disagree with the above.
 If you do, I care about your thoughts. This is worth discussing and
 fighting for.

 All the above being said, I'd like to 

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-13 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 16:01 +, Amrith Kumar wrote:
 How is a private IRC channel any different from a culture of private
 discussions? Having a chat over lunch, in the hallway, on the
 telephone, etc., 

I will articulate again why I think that a group of leaders of OpenStack
*should not* establish a *permanent* private channel for them to hang
out.  This community values openness, all the leaders of this community
are accessible, have open-door policies. This community (call it
'organization' if you prefer) has values and habits, all revolve around
public and accessible discussions. A *permanent* private channel for
OpenStack has nothing to do in this community and should not exist.

The causes for this permanent channel need to be identified and removed.

 Let me be honest with you and say this. If you or someone else can
 show me a good reason why the IRC channel (password protected) that I
 participate in is somehow bad for open communication, I will be happy
 to fix that. 

No, sorry, it has to be the other way around: we've been having IRC
public channels and public conversations for years and we've created one
of the largest, probably the fastest growing open source collaboration
out there. It's up to you to demonstrate why you need a private
*permanent* channel. 

 And so far, no real indication of why IRC is worse than a private
 phone call or a water-cooler conversation on a regular basis. 

Multiple people have explained why already and you're choosing to ignore
their words: permanent private IRC channels are a bad habit that
reinforces a bad, anti-social behavior. When people develop the habit of
hanging out separately from the rest, aristocracies start to emerge.
That's bad for an open and democratic meritocracy like OpenStack.

 Stefano, I agree. Private conversations should be the norm. 

That's not what I wanted to say. I'm saying the exact opposite: Private
conversations should *not* be the norm, even though they happen often
and are necessary, channes for private conversations should be created
ad-hoc when/where needed and destroyed afterwards. 

If we need private conversations so much to justify the creation of an
elitarian place for people to permanently hangout there we have a very
large problem that needs to be fixed.

Why do you need to hang out in private with fellow developers?

/stef


__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Chris Dent

On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Flavio Percoco wrote:

On 11/02/15 11:24 +, Chris Dent wrote:

I think it is time we recognize and act on the fact that the corporate
landlords that pay many of us to farm on this land need to provide more
resources. This will help to ensure the health of semi-artifical
opensource ecology that is OpenStack. At the moment many things are
packed tight with very little room to breathe. We need some air.


I agree with lots of what you said except for this last bit here. I
don't believe OpenStack is a semi-artificial opensrouce ecology.
OpenStack has demostrated throughout the years the ability of growing
without sacrificing openness.


Sorry that probably comes across sounding much more negative than I
intended. What I was trying to say was that there is an avenue that
is probably worth exploring to help with some of the issues that
overwhelm each of as individuals: Implore the corporate entities that
pay us to provide more resources so that there is more room within the
community for people to work on things with less pressure.

There are significant numbers of us who work on OpenStack because it
is our job. Mind you its a pretty cool job with lots of interesting
people and good stuff to learn, but it is a job; one in which money
is a factor.

That money is being applied by the corporate entities because it is in
their interest for this thing called OpenStack to be created _and_ that
it be created in the collaborative fashion provided by opensource.

A lot of people are finding it hard to be as effective as they'd
like to be. One way (of presumably many) to deal with that is to
make sure the economic beneficiaries are fully aware of the
situation. If they are rational actors they may wish to do something
to improve the situation.


Saying OpenStack is semi-artificial opensource is degrading some of
the things most of us have been fighting for. I'm not offended, just
worried. We've many similar messages from outside the community and
having them coming from within the community is worrisome.


a) I'm relatively new, so am fairly fresh-face and naive and willing
   to make somewhat stupid generalities based on things not being
   like what I'm used to. This has its pros and cons...

b) I've been doing some form of FLOSS software on unix-like machines since
   long before the term opensource was popularized. I'm not
   scratching an itch or working on a problem that is solved by
   making OpenStack better. I made a lot of changes to PAM a long
   time ago because I needed better auth on the servers I managed.
   Today I work on OpenStack because the combination of pay and
   learning opportunities make it a reasonable job. There are lots
   of people like me.

b is what makes it semi-artificial. I'm not stating it as a
pejorative. Corporate opensource is a grand thing and I'm very happy
to see it exist, but it's _different_ from old(er) school itch-
scratching opensource, more...constructed?

All I'm saying is that we should recognize that difference and use
it where it could be useful. In practical terms: let's get the landlords
to open up the purse a bit. I think this is a reasonable request: If
your computer no longer has enough memory to do your job you ask
your manager to get your more RAM. Pretty similar thing going on
here.

What the OpenStack community did and does is truly remarkable and that
it has done it while maintaining its opensource cred is a credit to
people like yourself who have kept up the good fight. It's a very
complex environment.


That said, I may have mis-understood what you meant so, please correct
me if I did. Tired and I should've probably waited 'til tomorrow
before replying. Oh well, :D


I may be in the same boat.

--
Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent
https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 12/02/15 12:04 +, Chris Dent wrote:

On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Flavio Percoco wrote:


The important bit, thoguh, is that email is meant for asynchronous
communication and IRC isn't. If things that require the intervention
of other folks from the community are being discussed and those folks
are not on IRC, it'd be wrong to consider the topic as discussed.


This is really the crux of the biscuit and thank you for continuing
to bring it back round to this point.

My personal experience of OpenStack has been that unless I am

* on IRC (too) many hours per day
* going to (too) many IRC meetings when I should be doing something
 interesting with my family
* watching a fair few spec and governance gerrits

then I will miss out on not just the decision making _process_ for
things which are relevant to the work I need or want to do and plan
for but also the _decisions_ themselves.

For example how many people really know the extent and impact of the
big tent governance plans?

Ideally I should be able to delegate a lot of this farming for
information to other people in the community but that only works if
there is a habit by those others of summarizing to the mailing list.

(Which goes back to my earlier point about of gosh aren't we all a
bit busy?)


These are good observations and they impact 2 things. How things are
communicated and our *phisical* ability to cover many things. W.r.t
the later, it's hard to know when something simple is not part of our
responsabilities and that we should delegate to others (this goes back
to what you said in your other email).

That said, I think a key point in understanding when something is not
OK with the way your community (in this case project) communicates is
by analyzing what the effort you need to put on keeping yourself
updated is. If you need ninja-skills to avoid missing things in the
project you're working on, then IMHO there's something wrong.

The above is why I mentioned in one of my previous replies that email
should be the default. I hate emails, really, but It'd take me way
more to dig into all the IRC logs and ping people than just reading
more emails.

If that weren't enough, there're also timezones and a whole bunch of
other things related to this.

I guess what I want to say here - besides that I should probably stop
for today - is that we should strive to make it easier for people to
participate in discussions - keeping in mind all the things related to
this, Nikola elaborated a quite good list in one of his replies - but
we also should be very careful with burnouts.

But that probably deserves a different thread.
Flavio



--
Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent
https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent

__
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


pgpc3lHpFPmP2.pgp
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-02-12 18:34:56 +0100 (+0100), Flavio Percoco wrote:
[...]
 we *don't* have a public voip channel
[...]

Well, technically we do if you want one.

https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Conferencing

But of course the logistics around all the project connecting in and
talking at once would be a bit nightmarish.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Nikhil Manchanda
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:55 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:
 [...]

 ## Keep discussions open

 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
 discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
 went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
 good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
 don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
 that you had enough consensus.


Completely agree with what you've said here. I think there's a place for
private conversation (eg. discussing a security issue that corresponds
to a CVE, giving folks honest feedback without public shaming, quickly
pinging someone, etc.) but when it comes to discussions that have a
bearing on a project (albeit however minimal) we need to ensure that all
of those happen in the open, so that any interested parties are able to
participate. Personally, I have not seen any examples of private talks
which have led to making decisions in the absence of community
discussion, but if this is happening -- we need to put a definitive stop
to it.


 [...]

 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.

 If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
 most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
 mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
 with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
 that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
 list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
 your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*

 Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
 We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
 advantage of it?


We should absolutely take advantage of all forms of communication, and
all the tools that we have at our disposal so that we can foster more
open and clear communication. However, I do realize that different
strokes work for different folks. While many might find it more
effective to communicate over email, others find IRC, or even a
VOIP call a better way of ironing out differences. I don't think that
makes any one method of communication better than others. While
I personally believe that every discussion or design conversation that
happens on IRC does not need to be taken to the mailing list, there's
absolutely nothing that should prohibit anyone in the community from
taking a discussion from IRC (or anywhere else) to the mailing list at
_any_ time.


 ## Cores are *NOT* special

 At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
 changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
 a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
 that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
 protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
 [...]

Completely agree with you about cores not being super-heroes. On the
latter point though, I'd consider that there's certainly a reasonable
subset of conversations that are okay to have in private (like security
related issues, and some other examples already cited above). However,
if the existence of machinery which makes having such conversations
convenient (hangout, private IRC, face-to-face in a closed room,
whatever) seems to have a detrimental effect on the spirit of openness
in our community, then I would err on the side of caution and dismantle
that machinery rather than let our commitment to openness come under
fire.


 [...]

 All the above being said, I'd like to thank everyone who fights for
 the openness of our community and encourage everyone to make that a
 must have thing in each sub-community. You don't need to be
 core-reviewer or PTL to do so. Speak up and help keeping the community
 as open as possible.

 Cheers,
 Flavio

Thanks for putting this together Flavio -- a timely reminder to strive
towards keeping our community open and inclusive. It's much appreciated!
__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Flavio Percoco's message of 2015-02-12 00:13:35 -0800:
 On 11/02/15 09:37 -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:
 Excerpts from Stefano Maffulli's message of 2015-02-11 06:14:39 -0800:
  On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 10:55 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
   This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 
  It's good to have a reminder every now and then. Thank you Flavio for
  caring enough to notice bad patterns and for raising a flag.
 
   ## Keep discussions open
  
   I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
   discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
   there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
   HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
   discussions sufficient.
  [...]
 
  Well said. Conversations can happen anywhere and any time, but they
  should stay in open and accessible channels. Consensus needs to be built
  and decisions need to be shared, agreed upon by the community at large
  (and mailing lists are the most accessible media we have).
 
  That said, it's is very hard to generalize and I'd rather deal/solve
  specific examples. Sometimes, I'm sure there are episodes when a fast
  decision was needed and a limited amount of people had to carry the
  burden of responsibility. Life is hard, software development is hard and
  general rules sometimes need to be adapted to the reality. Again, too
  much generalization here for what I'm confortable with.
 
  Maybe it's worth repeating that I'm personally (and in my role)
  available to listen and mediate in cases when communication seems to
  happen behind closed doors. If you think something unhealthy is
  happening, talk to me (confidentiality assured).
 
   ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
  
   I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
   hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions.
 
  Not sure I agree with the causality but, the facts are those: traffic on
  the list and on IRC is very high (although not increasing anymore
  [1][2]).
 
I
   don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
   to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
   happen.
 
  Email is hard, I have the feeling that the vast majority of people use
  bad (they all suck, no joke) email clients. Lots and lots of email is
  even worse. Most contributors commit very few patches: the investment
  for them to configure their MUA to filter our traffic is too high.
 
  I have added more topics today to the openstack-dev list[3]. Maybe,
  besides filtering on the receiving end, we may spend some time
  explaining how to use mailman topics? I'll draft something on Ask, it
  may help those that have limited interest in OpenStack.
 
  What else can we do to make things better?
 
 
 I am one of those people who has a highly optimized MUA for mailing list
 reading. It is still hard. Even with one keypress to kill threads from
 view forever, and full text index searching, I still find it takes me
 an hour just to filter the don't want to see from the want to see
 threads each day.
 
 The filtering on the list-server side I think is not known by everybody,
 and it might be a good idea to socialize it even more, and maybe even
 invest in making the UI for it really straight forward for people to
 use.
 
 That said, even if you just choose [all], and [yourproject], some
 [yourproject] tags are pretty busy.
 
 Would it be helpful if we share our email clients configs so that
 others can use them? I guess we could have a section for this in the
 wiki page.
 
 I'm sure each one of us has his/her own server-side filters so, I
 guess we could start with those.
 

Great idea Flavio. I went ahead and created a github repository with my
sup-mail hook which tags everything with openstack-dev. The mail client
itself is where most of the magic happens, but being able to read all
the openstack-dev things and then all the not openstack-dev things
is quite important to my email workflow.

I called the repository FERK for Firehose Email Reading Kit. I'm
happy to merge pull requests if people want to share their other email
client configurations and also things like procmail filters.

https://github.com/SpamapS/ferk

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 12/02/15 01:41 -0800, Nikhil Manchanda wrote:


On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:55 AM, Flavio Percoco fla...@redhat.com wrote:

[...]

## Keep discussions open

I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
that you had enough consensus.



Completely agree with what you've said here. I think there's a place for
private conversation (eg. discussing a security issue that corresponds
to a CVE, giving folks honest feedback without public shaming, quickly
pinging someone, etc.) but when it comes to discussions that have a
bearing on a project (albeit however minimal) we need to ensure that all
of those happen in the open, so that any interested parties are able to
participate. Personally, I have not seen any examples of private talks
which have led to making decisions in the absence of community
discussion, but if this is happening -- we need to put a definitive stop
to it.


I have seen it and I've also seen things like: This was discussed in
a call and it's good to go

CVE's are a special exception and I'd even argue on the need of
private conversations there. However, lets say there's a private IRC
discussion to quickly solve the CVE. Right after such discussion, the
feedback *has* to be put on the bug otherwise people reviewing the
patch - or even just following the bug - will be missing some context
on the proposed solution or state of the discussion. This fallsback to
the point that it'll probably take as much time to discuss something
privately and then explain it to others than simply keep it open.

That's why we have private bugs for CVEs.

As far as giving honest feedback goes, that's a personal conversation
and I don't really care how/where that happens as long as there are no
discussions about the project itself. If feeedback w.r.t the project -
no individual's comments, performance, work, code, etc - is being
discussed, it can perfectly happen in the public channel.


[...]

## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
happen.

If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*

Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
advantage of it?



We should absolutely take advantage of all forms of communication, and
all the tools that we have at our disposal so that we can foster more
open and clear communication. However, I do realize that different
strokes work for different folks. While many might find it more
effective to communicate over email, others find IRC, or even a
VOIP call a better way of ironing out differences. I don't think that
makes any one method of communication better than others. While
I personally believe that every discussion or design conversation that
happens on IRC does not need to be taken to the mailing list, there's
absolutely nothing that should prohibit anyone in the community from
taking a discussion from IRC (or anywhere else) to the mailing list at
_any_ time.


Probably not every decision but I'd go as far as saying that almost
all of them. The reason goes even beyond just openness. The mailing
list also brings history, indexed contents, etc. Good thing that many
channels have logging enabled.

The important bit, thoguh, is that email is meant for asynchronous
communication and IRC isn't. If things that require the intervention
of other folks from the community are being discussed and those folks
are not on IRC, it'd be wrong to consider the topic as discussed.

Will that slow down the work? Yes, likely, but that's the trade-off
we're paying to keep things right and keep this community as a place
where we all feel comfortable to work in.

There's a lot of common sense in the decision of moving discussions to
the m-l or not. However, when in doubt, I'd say the mailing list is
the 

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Kuvaja, Erno
 -Original Message-
 From: Donald Stufft [mailto:don...@stufft.io]
 Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 4:34 PM
 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
 Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets
 fight for it
 
 
  On Feb 11, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
 
  On 2015-02-11 11:31:13 + (+), Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
  [...]
  If you don't belong to the group of privileged living in the area and
  receiving free ticket somehow or company paying your participation
  you're not included. $600 + travel + accommodation is quite hefty
  premium to be included, not really FOSS.
  [...]
 
  Here I have to respectfully disagree. Anyone who uploads a change to
  an official OpenStack source code repository for review and has it
  approved/merged since Juno release day gets a 100% discount comp
  voucher for the full conference and design summit coming up in May.
  In addition, much like a lot of other large free software projects do
  for their conferences, the OpenStack Foundation sets aside funding[1]
  to cover travel and lodging for participants who need it.
  Let's (continue to) make sure this _is_ really FOSS, and that any of
  our contributors who want to be involved can be involved.
 
  [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Travel_Support_Program
 
 For whatever it's worth, I totally agree that the summits don't make
 Openstack not really FOSS and I think the travel program is great, but I do
 just want to point out (as someone for whom travel is not monetarily dificult,
 but
 logistically) that decision making which requires travel can be exclusive. I
 don't personally get too bothered by it but it feels like maybe the
 fundamental issue that some are expericing is when there are decisions
 being made via a single channel, regardless of if that channel is a phone 
 call,
 IRC, a mailing list, or a design summit. The more channels any particular
 decision involves the more likely it is nobody is going to feel like they 
 didn't
 get a chance to participate.
 
 ---
 Donald Stufft
 PGP: 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA

Thanks Donald,

My point exactly even I now see it did not come out really that way.

Thanks Jeremy,

I'd like to point out that that this discussion has been pushing all inclusive 
open approach. Not ATC, not specially approved individuals, but everyone. 
Mailing list can easily facilitate participation of everyone who wishes to do 
so. Summits cannot. If we pull the line to ATCs and specially invited 
individuals, we can throw this whole topic to the trash as 90% of the discussed 
was just dismissed.

All,

I'm not attacking against having summits, I think the face to face time is 
incredibly valuable for all kind of things. My point was to bring up general 
flaw of the flow between all inclusive decision making vs. decided in summit 
session.

- Erno

 
 
 __
 
 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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Nikola Đipanov
On 02/11/2015 06:20 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
 Excerpts from Nikola Đipanov's message of 2015-02-11 05:26:47 -0800:
 On 02/11/2015 02:13 PM, Sean Dague wrote:

 If core team members start dropping off external IRC where they are
 communicating across corporate boundaries, then the local tribal effects
 start taking over. You get people start talking about the upstream as
 them. The moment we get into us vs. them, we've got a problem.
 Especially when the upstream project is them.


 A lot of assumptions being presented as fact here.

 I believe the technical term for the above is 'slippery slope fallacy'.

 
 I don't see that fallacy, though it could descend into that if people
 keep pushing in that direction. Where I think Sean did a nice job
 stopping short of the slippery slope is that he only identified the step
 that is happening _now_, not the next step.
 
 I tend to agree that right now, if core team members are not talking
 on IRC to other core members in the open, whether inside or outside
 corporate boundaries, then we do see an us vs. them mentality happen.
 It's not I think thats the next step. I have personally seen that
 happening and will work hard to stop it. I think Sean has probably seen
 his share of it too,  as that is what he described in detail without
 publicly shaming anyone or any company (well done Sean).
 

There are several things I don't agree with in Sean's email, but this
one strikes me as particularly annoying, and potentially dangerous. You
also reinforce it in your reply.

Both of you seem to imply that there is the right way to do OpenStack,
and be core outside of following the development process. The notion
is annoying because it leads to exclusivity that Flavio complains about,
and is making our community a worse place for that. Different people who
can be valuable contributors, have wildly different (to name only a
few): personal styles of working, obligations to their own employer,
obligations to their family, level of command of the English language,
possibility to travel to remote parts of the world, possibility to cross
boarders without additional strain on time and finances, possibility to
engage in a real-time written discussion, possibility to engage in a
real time discussion in person in a language that is not their own in a
room full of native speakers of the used language, possibility to engage
in real-time discussions effectively. Need I go on...

Not only does your and Sean's argument not acknowledge these differences
that can easily lead to exclusion of valuable contributors - you
actually go as far as to say that unless everyone does it the right
way, the community will be worse for it, and try to back it up with
made up stuff like local tribe effects (really?! We are talking about
adult professional people here).

So yes there is a us and them - but the divide is not where you
think it is. This is why I believe an argument like this dropped smack
in the middle of a discussion like the one Flavio started is deeply
toxic, all fallacies aside.

 We can and _must_ do much better than this on this mailing list! Let's
 drag the discussion level back up!
 
 I'm certain we can always improve, and I appreciate you taking the time
 to have a Gandalf moment to stop the Balrog of fallacy from  entering
 this thread. We seriously can't let the discussion slip down that
 slope.. oh wait.
 

LOL on the LOTR reference (I look nothing like Gandalf though I may
dress like that sometimes). I hope I explained what I meant when I said
that this kind of argument really has no place in a discussion about
making the community more open by nurturing open communication.

 That said, I do want us to talk about uncomfortable things when
 necessary. I think this thread is not something where it will be entirely
 productive to stay 100% positive throughout. We might just have to use
 some negative language along side our positive suggestions to make sure
 people have an efficient way to measure their own behavior.


By all means - I only wish there would be more level-headed discussion
about the negatives around here.

N.

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 11/02/15 09:37 -0800, Clint Byrum wrote:

Excerpts from Stefano Maffulli's message of 2015-02-11 06:14:39 -0800:

On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 10:55 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.

It's good to have a reminder every now and then. Thank you Flavio for
caring enough to notice bad patterns and for raising a flag.

 ## Keep discussions open

 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient.
[...]

Well said. Conversations can happen anywhere and any time, but they
should stay in open and accessible channels. Consensus needs to be built
and decisions need to be shared, agreed upon by the community at large
(and mailing lists are the most accessible media we have).

That said, it's is very hard to generalize and I'd rather deal/solve
specific examples. Sometimes, I'm sure there are episodes when a fast
decision was needed and a limited amount of people had to carry the
burden of responsibility. Life is hard, software development is hard and
general rules sometimes need to be adapted to the reality. Again, too
much generalization here for what I'm confortable with.

Maybe it's worth repeating that I'm personally (and in my role)
available to listen and mediate in cases when communication seems to
happen behind closed doors. If you think something unhealthy is
happening, talk to me (confidentiality assured).

 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions.

Not sure I agree with the causality but, the facts are those: traffic on
the list and on IRC is very high (although not increasing anymore
[1][2]).

  I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.

Email is hard, I have the feeling that the vast majority of people use
bad (they all suck, no joke) email clients. Lots and lots of email is
even worse. Most contributors commit very few patches: the investment
for them to configure their MUA to filter our traffic is too high.

I have added more topics today to the openstack-dev list[3]. Maybe,
besides filtering on the receiving end, we may spend some time
explaining how to use mailman topics? I'll draft something on Ask, it
may help those that have limited interest in OpenStack.

What else can we do to make things better?



I am one of those people who has a highly optimized MUA for mailing list
reading. It is still hard. Even with one keypress to kill threads from
view forever, and full text index searching, I still find it takes me
an hour just to filter the don't want to see from the want to see
threads each day.

The filtering on the list-server side I think is not known by everybody,
and it might be a good idea to socialize it even more, and maybe even
invest in making the UI for it really straight forward for people to
use.

That said, even if you just choose [all], and [yourproject], some
[yourproject] tags are pretty busy.


Would it be helpful if we share our email clients configs so that
others can use them? I guess we could have a section for this in the
wiki page.

I'm sure each one of us has his/her own server-side filters so, I
guess we could start with those.

Cheers,
Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


pgpD0VSZxPbJY.pgp
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Thierry Carrez
Flavio Percoco wrote:
 On 11/02/15 17:19 +, Amrith Kumar wrote:
 Personally, I think the focus on password protected IRC channels is a
 distraction from the real issue that we need to ensure that the
 rapidly growing community is one where public discussion and decision
 making are still the norm. Let's be adult about it and realize that
 people will have private conversations. What we need to focus on is
 ensuring that the community rejects private decision making.
 
 I personally don't care if you have private discussions with other
 folks regardless of what their ATC status and impact on the community
 is. You're free to do so, I don't plan to critizice that and that's
 entirely your problem. However, I do care when those discussions
 happen in a private IRC channel because I don't beleive that's neither
 good for our community nor necessary.
 
 It's not good for our community because it *excludes* people that are
 not in such channels and it creates the wrong message around what core
 means, just like it happened with integrated projects and like it
 happens with PTLs. In addition to that, it isolates discussions which
 is something we've been encouraging people not to do because not
 everyone sees it the same way.

Right. You can't prevent occasional private discussions and pings, and
you shouldn't. It's when you encourage and officialize them (by for
example creating a channel for them) that things start to go bad.

I've been using IRC for more than 20 years, and with various FOSS
communities. I've been in a number of private channels, and they
*always* are a slippery slope to a private club, which quickly turns
into a clique. Those are cozy and convenient: only your friends are
listening, nobody objects with you. It really takes a non-trivial amount
of effort on all participants to continue having public discussions
where they belong, because it's easier and more natural to talk to a
controlled group. When I was working at Canonical, we continually
struggled to have the Ubuntu Server discussions in the Freenode
#ubuntu-server channel instead of on the Canonical IRC #server channel.
That's only human nature.

We can't avoid companies setting up private IRC channels. But we can
avoid OpenStack project teams from setting those up. And I really think
we should. Private discussions should be exceptional rather than the
norm, and avoiding setting up IRC channels for them is a great way to
ensure they stay exceptional.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 10:37 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 Right. You can't prevent occasional private discussions and pings, and
 you shouldn't. It's when you encourage and officialize them (by for
 example creating a channel for them) that things start to go bad.

Yes, that's very bad. Private IRC channels are a bad habit that
reinforces a bad, anti-social behavior. And IRC is mostly a habit: I
join tens of channels but I regularly read one or two. Most people I
know have similar habits.

Private conversations are a fact of life but in OpenStack space they
should be the *exception*, created when needed and destroyed after the
crisis. 

I have private conversations all the time: they are about specific
individuals, include sensitive data, legal issues that cannot be
diffused and similar. I create a private channel or a PM for that
conversation only. 

I don't hang out with others in a private channel: that's a very bad
habit. if you have a private channel you hangout there, you'll read that
channel, share jokes on that and will eventually throw in there topics
to discuss that are perfectly safe to discuss publicly. 


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 10:35 +, Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
 I'm not attacking against having summits, I think the face to face
 time is incredibly valuable for all kind of things. My point was to
 bring up general flaw of the flow between all inclusive decision
 making vs. decided in summit session.

I have the feeling you're assigning too much importance to the
conversations that happen face to face in the summit. Summits are the
apex, the end (or one of the final moments) of conversations that
started months/weeks before the bi-annual event. They're not the place
where an elite shows up, discusses newly revealed topics and decides
without involving anyone else.

With the design summits being the result of longer conversations, there
is very little risk for the relevant people for *that specific*
conversation not to be in the room. For those rare occasions, we have
setup VoIP bridges and other tools to include them in the room, in real
time and have them participate to the decision-making process in full.

I don't accept the thought that everything has to go back to the mailing
list because that would slow us down *even more*. We're trying to keep a
fine balancing act in place here, between speed and execution and
inclusion. If someone has troubles going to the Summit, let's talk and
solve the problems of the individuals because we can't generalize this
issue too much.

/stef


__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Chris Dent

On Thu, 12 Feb 2015, Flavio Percoco wrote:


The important bit, thoguh, is that email is meant for asynchronous
communication and IRC isn't. If things that require the intervention
of other folks from the community are being discussed and those folks
are not on IRC, it'd be wrong to consider the topic as discussed.


This is really the crux of the biscuit and thank you for continuing
to bring it back round to this point.

My personal experience of OpenStack has been that unless I am

* on IRC (too) many hours per day
* going to (too) many IRC meetings when I should be doing something
  interesting with my family
* watching a fair few spec and governance gerrits

then I will miss out on not just the decision making _process_ for
things which are relevant to the work I need or want to do and plan
for but also the _decisions_ themselves.

For example how many people really know the extent and impact of the
big tent governance plans?

Ideally I should be able to delegate a lot of this farming for
information to other people in the community but that only works if
there is a habit by those others of summarizing to the mailing list.

(Which goes back to my earlier point about of gosh aren't we all a
bit busy?)

--
Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent
https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Alan Pevec
 I think there's a place for
 private conversation (eg. discussing a security issue that corresponds
 to a CVE...

 CVE's are a special exception and I'd even argue on the need of
 private conversations there.

Discussing CVEs in private came up few times but I'm not sure IRC is
secure enough for that.
IMHO discussion about embargoed issues must  be kept in private
Launchpad bugs but I'd like to hear from VMT team.


Cheers,
Alan

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-02-12 17:20:37 +0100 (+0100), Alan Pevec wrote:
 Discussing CVEs in private came up few times but I'm not sure IRC
 is secure enough for that. IMHO discussion about embargoed issues
 must be kept in private Launchpad bugs but I'd like to hear from
 VMT team.

I do from time to time /msg a security review liaison for some
particular project to bring a new vulnerability report to their
attention or prod them to put a status update in an embargoed bug. I
connect to IRC via SSL/TLS, authenticate and protect my nick through
the network's nickserv bot and hope most of them follow the same
precautions. Nevertheless I do try not to discuss specifics, but
rather keep those brief exchanges vague/general.

In the end I'm not sure private, encrypted, authenticated discussion
in IRC is substantially less secure than having a bug set to private
in launchpad though (after all, I and the rest of the project
infrastructure admins don't run either freenode nor launchpad so
we're beholden to them to keep their services above board
regardless).

The VMT also do collectively have brief private discussions with one
another via a variety of secured media around logistics/coordination
efforts and to perform last-minute checks of our advisory texts prior
to disclosure, but I don't want to paint the VMT in a special light
here and feel that the point of all this is that the result of any
such discussions should be reflected in public as soon as it is safe
to do so (be that making the bug visible to everyone, sending an
OSSA to various mailing lists, pushing patches into Gerrit, et
cetera).
-- 
Jeremy Stanley


signature.asc
Description: Digital 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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-02-12 10:35:18 + (+), Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
[...]
 I'd like to point out that that this discussion has been pushing
 all inclusive open approach. Not ATC, not specially approved
 individuals, but everyone. Mailing list can easily facilitate
 participation of everyone who wishes to do so. Summits cannot. If
 we pull the line to ATCs and specially invited individuals, we can
 throw this whole topic to the trash as 90% of the discussed was
 just dismissed.
[...]

And perhaps I too should have been more clear. Plenty of people who
have not contributed a patch to a project but contribute to the
community in other ways also get free passes to the conference and
qualify for travel assistance funding. It's just that we have an
easy way to track code contributions so we can wrap some automation
around that (along with people who have speaking proposals accepted,
who assist as track chairs, who volunteer to assist with day-of
tasks for the conference, et cetera), but anyone else who is
consistently contributing should feel free to reach out and request
complimentary passes or assistance.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Amrith Kumar
, if you are participating in a private IRC channel, I ask you to please
| reconsider leaving such medium and encourage the openness.

Let me be honest with you and say this. If you or someone else can show me a 
good reason why the IRC channel (password protected) that I participate in is 
somehow bad for open communication, I will be happy to fix that. And so far, no 
real indication of why IRC is worse than a private phone call or a water-cooler 
conversation on a regular basis. So if you think that eliminating private IRC 
channels will solve some problem, I have to tell you that this it is my 
considered opinion that this is a misguided notion, and suggest that in the 
interest of the shared goal that we have (open communication, ...) that we 
address the real problems and build the right behaviors.

Stefano writes,

| On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 10:37 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
|  Right. You can't prevent occasional private discussions and pings, and
|  you shouldn't. It's when you encourage and officialize them (by for
|  example creating a channel for them) that things start to go bad.
| 
| Yes, that's very bad. Private IRC channels are a bad habit that reinforces
| a bad, anti-social behavior. And IRC is mostly a habit: I join tens of
| channels but I regularly read one or two. Most people I know have similar
| habits.
| 
| Private conversations are a fact of life but in OpenStack space they
| should be the *exception*, created when needed and destroyed after the
| crisis.
| 
| I have private conversations all the time: they are about specific
| individuals, include sensitive data, legal issues that cannot be diffused
| and similar. I create a private channel or a PM for that conversation
| only.
| 
| I don't hang out with others in a private channel: that's a very bad
| habit. if you have a private channel you hangout there, you'll read that
| channel, share jokes on that and will eventually throw in there topics to
| discuss that are perfectly safe to discuss publicly.

Stefano, I agree. Private conversations should be the norm. And private 
conversations that circumvent the public discussion decision making process are 
bad. Why then the specific demonization of private IRC in particular?

My 2c, and thanks for surfacing this issue and keeping this conversation in the 
open.

-amrith

--

Amrith Kumar, CTO Tesora (www.tesora.com)

Twitter: @amrithkumar  
IRC: amrith @freenode 






| -Original Message-
| From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:fla...@redhat.com]
| Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 3:06 AM
| To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
| Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets
| fight for it
| 
| On 11/02/15 17:19 +, Amrith Kumar wrote:
| 
| [snip]
| 
| Mostly, I'm very happy to see Flavio's email which ends with this:
| 
|  All the above being said, I'd like to thank everyone who fights for
|  the openness of our community and encourage everyone to make that a
|  must have thing in each sub-community. You don't need to be core-
| reviewer or PTL to do so. Speak up and help keeping the community as open
| as possible.
| 
| Open decision making and discussion are absolutely the lifeblood of an
| open source community. And I agree, as an ATC I will fight for the open
| discussion and decision making. In equal measure, I recognize that I'm
| human and there are times when a quiet sidebar with someone, either on
| the telephone, or over a glass of suitable beverage can go further and
| quicker than any extent of public conversation with the exact same
| participants.
| 
| You write:
| 
| | This is seriously disturbing.
| 
| Yes, what would be seriously disturbing would be if there were decisions
| being made without the open/public scrutiny.
| 
| There seems to be a leap-of-faith that a private IRC channel implies
| covert decisions and therefore they should be shutdown. OK, great, the
| Twenty-First Amendment took the same point of view, see how well that
| worked out.
| 
| I assure you that later today, tomorrow, and the next day, I will have
| private conversations with other ATC's. Some will be on the telephone, and
| some will be on public IRC channels with some totally unique name that
| you'd never know to guess. But, I will try my best to, and I welcome the
| feedback when people feel that I deviate from the norm of ensuring public,
| open discussion and decision making where all are invited to participate.
| 
| Personally, I think the focus on password protected IRC channels is a
| distraction from the real issue that we need to ensure that the rapidly
| growing community is one where public discussion and decision making are
| still the norm. Let's be adult about it and realize that people will
| have private conversations. What we need to focus on is ensuring that the
| community rejects private decision making.
| 
| I personally don't care if you have private discussions with other folks
| regardless of what their ATC status

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 11/02/15 17:19 +, Amrith Kumar wrote:

[snip]


Mostly, I'm very happy to see Flavio's email which ends with this:


All the above being said, I'd like to thank everyone who fights for the 
openness of our community
and encourage everyone to make that a must have thing in each sub-community. 
You don't need to
be core-reviewer or PTL to do so. Speak up and help keeping the community as 
open as possible.


Open decision making and discussion are absolutely the lifeblood of an open source 
community. And I agree, as an ATC I will fight for the open discussion and decision 
making. In equal measure, I recognize that I'm human and there are times when a quiet 
sidebar with someone, either on the telephone, or over a glass of suitable 
beverage can go further and quicker than any extent of public conversation with the exact 
same participants.

You write:

| This is seriously disturbing.

Yes, what would be seriously disturbing would be if there were decisions being 
made without the open/public scrutiny.

There seems to be a leap-of-faith that a private IRC channel implies covert 
decisions and therefore they should be shutdown. OK, great, the Twenty-First 
Amendment took the same point of view, see how well that worked out.

I assure you that later today, tomorrow, and the next day, I will have private 
conversations with other ATC's. Some will be on the telephone, and some will be 
on public IRC channels with some totally unique name that you'd never know to 
guess. But, I will try my best to, and I welcome the feedback when people feel 
that I deviate from the norm of ensuring public, open discussion and decision 
making where all are invited to participate.

Personally, I think the focus on password protected IRC channels is a distraction from the real 
issue that we need to ensure that the rapidly growing community is one where public discussion and 
decision making are still the norm. Let's be adult about it and realize that people 
will have private conversations. What we need to focus on is ensuring that the community rejects 
private decision making.


I personally don't care if you have private discussions with other
folks regardless of what their ATC status and impact on the community
is. You're free to do so, I don't plan to critizice that and that's
entirely your problem. However, I do care when those discussions
happen in a private IRC channel because I don't beleive that's neither
good for our community nor necessary.

It's not good for our community because it *excludes* people that are
not in such channels and it creates the wrong message around what core
means, just like it happened with integrated projects and like it
happens with PTLs. In addition to that, it isolates discussions which
is something we've been encouraging people not to do because not
everyone sees it the same way.

Furthermore, I don't think it is necessary because at the very end you
will have to disclose the discussion in order to make it effective
upstream. If this is not happening for you then I really don't want to
know it because I'd just rage quit. The reason for that is that the
only way to push something upstream without disclosing a hallway/phone
conversation is by having a small group of folks pushing whatever was
discussed quickly enough to avoid other community interactions, which
is more than just wrong.

Side Note: note that the above is not an accusation but just a
speculation based on your previous email and on the fact that I keep
fooling myself with the thought that I had seen it all and then
finding out new things.

Unfortunately, being an adult doesn't seem to be enough, we're lacking
of education on how open-source works and it's affecting a community
that we've been fighting to keep open and welcoming. If these casual
private conversations are affecting our community, I'd rather not have
them than seeing the work of these last years vanish.

Our community is far from perfect but lets try to not make it worse.
So, if you are participating in a private IRC channel, I ask you to
please reconsider leaving such medium and encourage the openness.

One last note. As someone that has mentored for the last three cycles
in Outreachy and that also mentored in GSoC in one of those cycles
(That makes it 4 programs in 3 cycles), I find it very offensive that
people that have been longer in this community do the opposite of what
I've been encouraging the participants of these programs to do. That
is, having the courage to participate in public discussion and
engaging with the community.


There, I said it, and I said it in the open.


And I infinitely thank you for this.

Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


pgpu_UbK5FTb3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Flavio Percoco
-priviledged. If you think that's not enough then I'll ask you to
give me access to both the cannel and its logs and I'll show you how
it harms our community. We've been working really hard to prevent all
kind of *priviledges* out of this community.

I don't expect the no-private-irc-channel thing to fix all the
problems we have but it's a matter of principles and education. The
problem is not the water-cooler/phone conversations you have but the
impact these conversations have in the community.

I've been part of many beer-cooler conversations and they all ended
in, lets bring this up to the community. However, I can assure you
that there was no tag on the beer-cooler with written if you ain't
core you ain't drinking. This means that those discussions were still
open (and ended open) and they were also welcoming and free as in
free beer.

Cheers,
Flavio


Stefano writes,

| On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 10:37 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
|  Right. You can't prevent occasional private discussions and pings, and
|  you shouldn't. It's when you encourage and officialize them (by for
|  example creating a channel for them) that things start to go bad.
|
| Yes, that's very bad. Private IRC channels are a bad habit that reinforces
| a bad, anti-social behavior. And IRC is mostly a habit: I join tens of
| channels but I regularly read one or two. Most people I know have similar
| habits.
|
| Private conversations are a fact of life but in OpenStack space they
| should be the *exception*, created when needed and destroyed after the
| crisis.
|
| I have private conversations all the time: they are about specific
| individuals, include sensitive data, legal issues that cannot be diffused
| and similar. I create a private channel or a PM for that conversation
| only.
|
| I don't hang out with others in a private channel: that's a very bad
| habit. if you have a private channel you hangout there, you'll read that
| channel, share jokes on that and will eventually throw in there topics to
| discuss that are perfectly safe to discuss publicly.

Stefano, I agree. Private conversations should be the norm. And private 
conversations that circumvent the public discussion decision making process are 
bad. Why then the specific demonization of private IRC in particular?

My 2c, and thanks for surfacing this issue and keeping this conversation in the 
open.

-amrith

--

Amrith Kumar, CTO Tesora (www.tesora.com)

Twitter: @amrithkumar
IRC: amrith @freenode






| -Original Message-
| From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:fla...@redhat.com]
| Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2015 3:06 AM
| To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
| Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets
| fight for it
|
| On 11/02/15 17:19 +, Amrith Kumar wrote:
|
| [snip]
|
| Mostly, I'm very happy to see Flavio's email which ends with this:
| 
|  All the above being said, I'd like to thank everyone who fights for
|  the openness of our community and encourage everyone to make that a
|  must have thing in each sub-community. You don't need to be core-
| reviewer or PTL to do so. Speak up and help keeping the community as open
| as possible.
| 
| Open decision making and discussion are absolutely the lifeblood of an
| open source community. And I agree, as an ATC I will fight for the open
| discussion and decision making. In equal measure, I recognize that I'm
| human and there are times when a quiet sidebar with someone, either on
| the telephone, or over a glass of suitable beverage can go further and
| quicker than any extent of public conversation with the exact same
| participants.
| 
| You write:
| 
| | This is seriously disturbing.
| 
| Yes, what would be seriously disturbing would be if there were decisions
| being made without the open/public scrutiny.
| 
| There seems to be a leap-of-faith that a private IRC channel implies
| covert decisions and therefore they should be shutdown. OK, great, the
| Twenty-First Amendment took the same point of view, see how well that
| worked out.
| 
| I assure you that later today, tomorrow, and the next day, I will have
| private conversations with other ATC's. Some will be on the telephone, and
| some will be on public IRC channels with some totally unique name that
| you'd never know to guess. But, I will try my best to, and I welcome the
| feedback when people feel that I deviate from the norm of ensuring public,
| open discussion and decision making where all are invited to participate.
| 
| Personally, I think the focus on password protected IRC channels is a
| distraction from the real issue that we need to ensure that the rapidly
| growing community is one where public discussion and decision making are
| still the norm. Let's be adult about it and realize that people will
| have private conversations. What we need to focus on is ensuring that the
| community rejects private decision making.
|
| I personally don't care if you have private discussions with other

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-12 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 11/02/15 11:24 +, Chris Dent wrote:

On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Flavio Percoco wrote:


During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
concerns.


Thanks for writing this. I agree with pretty much everything you say,
especially the focus on the mailing list being only truly available
and persistent medium we have for engaging everyone. Yes it is noisy
and takes work, but it is an important part of the work.

I'm not certain, but I have an intuition that many of the suboptimal
and moving-in-the-direction-of-closed behaviors that you're describing
are the result of people trying to cope with having too much to do
with insufficient tools. Technology projects often sacrifice the
management of information in favor of what's believed to be the core
task (making stuff?) when there are insufficient resources.

This is unfortunate because the effective sharing and management of
information is the fuel that drives, optimizes and corrects the entire
process and thus leads to more effective making of stuff.

This thread and many of the threads going around lately speak a lot
about people not being able to participate in a way that lets them
generate the most quality -- either because there's insufficient time
and energy to move the mountain or because each move they make opens
up another rabbit hole.

As many have said this is not sustainable.

Many of the proposed strategies or short term tactics involve trying to
hack the system so that work that is perceived to be extraneous is
removed or made secondary. This won't fix it.

I think it is time we recognize and act on the fact that the corporate
landlords that pay many of us to farm on this land need to provide more
resources. This will help to ensure the health of semi-artifical
opensource ecology that is OpenStack. At the moment many things are
packed tight with very little room to breathe. We need some air.


I agree with lots of what you said except for this last bit here. I
don't believe OpenStack is a semi-artificial opensrouce ecology.
OpenStack has demostrated throughout the years the ability of growing
without sacrificing openness.

Have there been cases where we've failed to do so? Probably but
there's always someone that raises the red-flag and calls out the
community on the things that are not working well enough.

Saying OpenStack is semi-artificial opensource is degrading some of
the things most of us have been fighting for. I'm not offended, just
worried. We've many similar messages from outside the community and
having them coming from within the community is worrisome.

That said, I may have mis-understood what you meant so, please correct
me if I did. Tired and I should've probably waited 'til tomorrow
before replying. Oh well, :D

Cheers,
Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


pgpAgmbwI00Mk.pgp
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-02-11 11:31:13 + (+), Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
[...]
 If you don't belong to the group of privileged living in the area
 and receiving free ticket somehow or company paying your
 participation you're not included. $600 + travel + accommodation
 is quite hefty premium to be included, not really FOSS.
[...]

Here I have to respectfully disagree. Anyone who uploads a change to
an official OpenStack source code repository for review and has it
approved/merged since Juno release day gets a 100% discount comp
voucher for the full conference and design summit coming up in May.
In addition, much like a lot of other large free software projects
do for their conferences, the OpenStack Foundation sets aside
funding[1] to cover travel and lodging for participants who need it.
Let's (continue to) make sure this _is_ really FOSS, and that any
of our contributors who want to be involved can be involved.

[1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Travel_Support_Program
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Amrith Kumar
Stefano,

You write:

| This is seriously disturbing.
| 
| If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
| please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as a
| community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
| 
| No public shaming, please: education first.

I was going to contact you privately but figured that would be ironic given the 
conversation we're having. So here is my reply to you in the open, for all to 
see and respond.

Let me begin by saying that I agree with a lot of what Flavio wrote. 

Where he says that decisions and discussions must always be made in the open, 
he is dead-on.

Where he says that decisions in private are bad, he is dead-on.

I beg to differ however on the subject of discussions in private (emphasis: 
discussions, not decisions). Now that sounds bad but let's leave private IRC 
channels aside.

If you and I had a phone call, that's not a bad thing. What is bad if we 
colluded in some way, and made a decision that we then foisted on the community 
as a done deal.

IRC is a great thing and so is the mailing list. And a lot of conversations are 
well suited for those mediums. And I read them regularly and I find them 
useful. However, I will admit that there are times when I just pick up the 
phone and call a colleague or call some other ATC in OpenStack.

As Flavio says in his email:

|  ## Keep discussions open
| 
|  I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
|  discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
|  there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
|  HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
|  discussions sufficient.

Further, there are in fact times when members of a core team can have 
meaningful discussions about things. Security related bugs are one, on occasion 
things like people's conduct (when it is marginal) and I can make a list of a 
couple of more things easily, but I think you see the point.

Given time-zones, long distance costs, and the like, IRC is a good option as is 
a private skype call or skype IM. Not everything is suitable for IRC/mailing 
list and a public forum. And in some cases since a public IRC channel with 
three parallel conversations going can be noisy, a less cluttered private 
conversation is invaluable.

Mostly, I'm very happy to see Flavio's email which ends with this:

 All the above being said, I'd like to thank everyone who fights for the 
 openness of our community 
 and encourage everyone to make that a must have thing in each sub-community. 
 You don't need to 
 be core-reviewer or PTL to do so. Speak up and help keeping the community as 
 open as possible.

Open decision making and discussion are absolutely the lifeblood of an open 
source community. And I agree, as an ATC I will fight for the open discussion 
and decision making. In equal measure, I recognize that I'm human and there are 
times when a quiet sidebar with someone, either on the telephone, or over a 
glass of suitable beverage can go further and quicker than any extent of public 
conversation with the exact same participants.

You write:

| This is seriously disturbing.

Yes, what would be seriously disturbing would be if there were decisions being 
made without the open/public scrutiny.

There seems to be a leap-of-faith that a private IRC channel implies covert 
decisions and therefore they should be shutdown. OK, great, the Twenty-First 
Amendment took the same point of view, see how well that worked out.

I assure you that later today, tomorrow, and the next day, I will have private 
conversations with other ATC's. Some will be on the telephone, and some will be 
on public IRC channels with some totally unique name that you'd never know to 
guess. But, I will try my best to, and I welcome the feedback when people feel 
that I deviate from the norm of ensuring public, open discussion and decision 
making where all are invited to participate.

Personally, I think the focus on password protected IRC channels is a 
distraction from the real issue that we need to ensure that the rapidly growing 
community is one where public discussion and decision making are still the 
norm. Let's be adult about it and realize that people will have private 
conversations. What we need to focus on is ensuring that the community rejects 
private decision making.

There, I said it, and I said it in the open.

-amrith

--

Amrith Kumar, CTO Tesora (www.tesora.com)

Twitter: @amrithkumar  
IRC: amrith @freenode 
I work on OpenStack Trove (#openstack-trove)



| -Original Message-
| From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:stef...@openstack.org]
| Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 9:15 AM
| To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
| Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets
| fight for it
| 
| On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 10:55 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
|  This email is dedicated to the openness of our

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Doug Hellmann


On Wed, Feb 11, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
 On 2015-02-11 11:31:13 + (+), Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
 [...]
  If you don't belong to the group of privileged living in the area
  and receiving free ticket somehow or company paying your
  participation you're not included. $600 + travel + accommodation
  is quite hefty premium to be included, not really FOSS.
 [...]
 
 Here I have to respectfully disagree. Anyone who uploads a change to
 an official OpenStack source code repository for review and has it
 approved/merged since Juno release day gets a 100% discount comp
 voucher for the full conference and design summit coming up in May.
 In addition, much like a lot of other large free software projects
 do for their conferences, the OpenStack Foundation sets aside
 funding[1] to cover travel and lodging for participants who need it.
 Let's (continue to) make sure this _is_ really FOSS, and that any
 of our contributors who want to be involved can be involved.
 
 [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Travel_Support_Program

Good reminder, Jeremy.

The travel program is in place to help contributors who wouldn't
otherwise be able to attend. Thanks to the commitment of generous
corporate sponsors, we've had success bringing a range of participants
to the past several summits -- not all of them developers. Everyone who
would like to attend the summit but won't have other sponsorship should
go to the wiki page to submit an application for the Vancouver summit.

Doug

 -- 
 Jeremy Stanley
 
 __
 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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Stefano Maffulli's message of 2015-02-11 06:14:39 -0800:
 On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 10:55 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
  This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 
 It's good to have a reminder every now and then. Thank you Flavio for
 caring enough to notice bad patterns and for raising a flag. 
 
  ## Keep discussions open
  
  I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
  discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
  there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
  HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
  discussions sufficient. 
 [...]
 
 Well said. Conversations can happen anywhere and any time, but they
 should stay in open and accessible channels. Consensus needs to be built
 and decisions need to be shared, agreed upon by the community at large
 (and mailing lists are the most accessible media we have). 
 
 That said, it's is very hard to generalize and I'd rather deal/solve
 specific examples. Sometimes, I'm sure there are episodes when a fast
 decision was needed and a limited amount of people had to carry the
 burden of responsibility. Life is hard, software development is hard and
 general rules sometimes need to be adapted to the reality. Again, too
 much generalization here for what I'm confortable with.
 
 Maybe it's worth repeating that I'm personally (and in my role)
 available to listen and mediate in cases when communication seems to
 happen behind closed doors. If you think something unhealthy is
 happening, talk to me (confidentiality assured).
 
  ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
  
  I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
  hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions.
 
 Not sure I agree with the causality but, the facts are those: traffic on
 the list and on IRC is very high (although not increasing anymore
 [1][2]).
 
   I
  don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
  to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
  happen.
 
 Email is hard, I have the feeling that the vast majority of people use
 bad (they all suck, no joke) email clients. Lots and lots of email is
 even worse. Most contributors commit very few patches: the investment
 for them to configure their MUA to filter our traffic is too high.
 
 I have added more topics today to the openstack-dev list[3]. Maybe,
 besides filtering on the receiving end, we may spend some time
 explaining how to use mailman topics? I'll draft something on Ask, it
 may help those that have limited interest in OpenStack.
 
 What else can we do to make things better?
 

I am one of those people who has a highly optimized MUA for mailing list
reading. It is still hard. Even with one keypress to kill threads from
view forever, and full text index searching, I still find it takes me
an hour just to filter the don't want to see from the want to see
threads each day.

The filtering on the list-server side I think is not known by everybody,
and it might be a good idea to socialize it even more, and maybe even
invest in making the UI for it really straight forward for people to
use.

That said, even if you just choose [all], and [yourproject], some
[yourproject] tags are pretty busy.

  ## Cores are *NOT* special
  
  At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
  changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
  a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
  that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
  protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
 
 This is seriously disturbing.
 
 If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
 please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
 a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
 
 No public shaming, please: education first.
 

I really like what you had to say above. I think we can do better and
I don't really blame those who've worked around OpenStack's problems
with their own solution. Whether or not that solution is in fact quite
dangerous for the project as a whole is another matter that we should
consider separately from why did these people feel a need to isolate
themselves?

I am confident this community will find a solution that works well
enough that we can move past this swiftly.

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:13:05AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
 On 02/11/2015 05:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
  ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 
  I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
  hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
  don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
  to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
  happen.
  
  Again, timezones. It is a physical impossibility for most people to
  be on IRC for more than 8 hours a day, so that's only 1/3 of the day
  that any signle person will likely be on IRC.  And no, expecting
  people to have a permanently connected IRC proxy and then read the
  other 16 hours of logs each morning is not a solution.
  
  Personally I've stopped joining IRC most the time regardless, because
  I feel I am far more productive when I'm not being interrupted with
  IRC pings every 20 minutes. There should be few things so urgent that
  they can't be dealt with over email. Again because of our timezone
  differences we should be wary of making important decisions in a
  rush - anything remotely non-trivial should have at least a 24 hour
  window to allow people on all timezones a chance to see the point
  and join in discussion.
 
 IRC is mostly not about discussions, it's about discussion, context,
 team building, and trust. And it's a cross organization open forum for that.
 
 If core team members start dropping off external IRC where they are
 communicating across corporate boundaries, then the local tribal effects
 start taking over. You get people start talking about the upstream as
 them. The moment we get into us vs. them, we've got a problem.
 Especially when the upstream project is them.

It is perfectly possible to communicate effectively over email. Pretty
much every single other open source project I've ever contributed to
works almost exclusively over email without their being corporate tribal
effects. OpenStack is really the exception here with its obsession on
using IRC for so much communication.

 So while I agree, I'd personally get a ton more done if I didn't make
 myself available to answer questions or help sort out misunderstandings
 people were having with things I'm an expert in, doing so would
 definitely detrimentally impact the project as a whole. So I find it an
 unfortunate decision for a core team member.

It is up to each individual to decide how they can maximise their
contribution to the project. I'm still more than happy to answer
questions in reviews, or via email, and will join IRC meetings where
there is an important topic that directly needs my input. I simply
feel that I can maximise the value of my contribution to the project
without being on IRC getting direct pings all the time, when the
overwhealming majority of those pings can be easily dealt with via
email or gerrit.

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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Doug Hellmann


On Wed, Feb 11, 2015, at 09:14 AM, Stefano Maffulli wrote:
 On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 10:55 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
  This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 
 It's good to have a reminder every now and then. Thank you Flavio for
 caring enough to notice bad patterns and for raising a flag. 
 
  ## Keep discussions open
  
  I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
  discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
  there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
  HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
  discussions sufficient. 
 [...]
 
 Well said. Conversations can happen anywhere and any time, but they
 should stay in open and accessible channels. Consensus needs to be built
 and decisions need to be shared, agreed upon by the community at large
 (and mailing lists are the most accessible media we have). 
 
 That said, it's is very hard to generalize and I'd rather deal/solve
 specific examples. Sometimes, I'm sure there are episodes when a fast
 decision was needed and a limited amount of people had to carry the
 burden of responsibility. Life is hard, software development is hard and
 general rules sometimes need to be adapted to the reality. Again, too
 much generalization here for what I'm confortable with.
 
 Maybe it's worth repeating that I'm personally (and in my role)
 available to listen and mediate in cases when communication seems to
 happen behind closed doors. If you think something unhealthy is
 happening, talk to me (confidentiality assured).
 
  ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
  
  I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
  hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions.
 
 Not sure I agree with the causality but, the facts are those: traffic on
 the list and on IRC is very high (although not increasing anymore
 [1][2]).
 
   I
  don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
  to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
  happen.
 
 Email is hard, I have the feeling that the vast majority of people use
 bad (they all suck, no joke) email clients. Lots and lots of email is
 even worse. Most contributors commit very few patches: the investment
 for them to configure their MUA to filter our traffic is too high.
 
 I have added more topics today to the openstack-dev list[3]. Maybe,
 besides filtering on the receiving end, we may spend some time
 explaining how to use mailman topics? I'll draft something on Ask, it
 may help those that have limited interest in OpenStack.
 
 What else can we do to make things better?
 
  ## Cores are *NOT* special
  
  At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
  changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
  a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
  that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
  protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
 
 This is seriously disturbing.
 
 If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
 please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
 a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
 
 No public shaming, please: education first.

Thanks for stepping in, Stef.

I want to also back what Sean said elsewhere in the thread, though. This
appears to be a serious breach of the openness policies of the project.
I hope the team in question resolves the situation themselves, and
quickly.

Doug

 
 Cheers,
 stef
 
 
 [1] http://activity.openstack.org/dash/browser/mls.html
 [2] http://activity.openstack.org/dash/browser/irc.html
 [3] thanks to Luigi Toscano for highlighting some missing ones
 
 
 __
 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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Donald Stufft

 On Feb 11, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
 
 On 2015-02-11 11:31:13 + (+), Kuvaja, Erno wrote:
 [...]
 If you don't belong to the group of privileged living in the area
 and receiving free ticket somehow or company paying your
 participation you're not included. $600 + travel + accommodation
 is quite hefty premium to be included, not really FOSS.
 [...]
 
 Here I have to respectfully disagree. Anyone who uploads a change to
 an official OpenStack source code repository for review and has it
 approved/merged since Juno release day gets a 100% discount comp
 voucher for the full conference and design summit coming up in May.
 In addition, much like a lot of other large free software projects
 do for their conferences, the OpenStack Foundation sets aside
 funding[1] to cover travel and lodging for participants who need it.
 Let's (continue to) make sure this _is_ really FOSS, and that any
 of our contributors who want to be involved can be involved.
 
 [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Travel_Support_Program

For whatever it's worth, I totally agree that the summits don't make Openstack
not really FOSS and I think the travel program is great, but I do just want
to point out (as someone for whom travel is not monetarily dificult, but
logistically) that decision making which requires travel can be exclusive. I
don't personally get too bothered by it but it feels like maybe the fundamental
issue that some are expericing is when there are decisions being made via a
single channel, regardless of if that channel is a phone call, IRC, a mailing
list, or a design summit. The more channels any particular decision involves
the more likely it is nobody is going to feel like they didn't get a chance
to participate.

---
Donald Stufft
PGP: 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA


__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 09:32 -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
 Definitely true, to each his/her own. I still consider it unfortunate.
 I've also heard core developers state that they stopped reading the
 mailing list months ago. Which I also find unfortunate.

That's terrible: do you know why they don't read the list anymore? If
you don't know why, could you ask them or (better yet) put me in touch
with them so I can work out a solution for them?

thanks,
stef


__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Doug Hellmann


On Wed, Feb 11, 2015, at 09:32 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
 On 02/11/2015 09:02 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
  On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:13:05AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
  On 02/11/2015 05:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
  ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 
  I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
  hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
  don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
  to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
  happen.
 
  Again, timezones. It is a physical impossibility for most people to
  be on IRC for more than 8 hours a day, so that's only 1/3 of the day
  that any signle person will likely be on IRC.  And no, expecting
  people to have a permanently connected IRC proxy and then read the
  other 16 hours of logs each morning is not a solution.
 
  Personally I've stopped joining IRC most the time regardless, because
  I feel I am far more productive when I'm not being interrupted with
  IRC pings every 20 minutes. There should be few things so urgent that
  they can't be dealt with over email. Again because of our timezone
  differences we should be wary of making important decisions in a
  rush - anything remotely non-trivial should have at least a 24 hour
  window to allow people on all timezones a chance to see the point
  and join in discussion.
 
  IRC is mostly not about discussions, it's about discussion, context,
  team building, and trust. And it's a cross organization open forum for 
  that.
 
  If core team members start dropping off external IRC where they are
  communicating across corporate boundaries, then the local tribal effects
  start taking over. You get people start talking about the upstream as
  them. The moment we get into us vs. them, we've got a problem.
  Especially when the upstream project is them.
  
  It is perfectly possible to communicate effectively over email. Pretty
  much every single other open source project I've ever contributed to
  works almost exclusively over email without their being corporate tribal
  effects. OpenStack is really the exception here with its obsession on
  using IRC for so much communication.
 
 My experiences have been different. While a lot of projects mirrored the
 kernel process which was all mailing list, most of the projects I've
 worked on that haven't been written in C are far more IRC driven.
 
 Every time I've had to address an issue with a non OpenStack python
 dependency, it's been IRC to get things done, not a mailing list. Most
 of these projects don't have mailing lists. A lot of people come to
 OpenStack from those sorts of project cultures. So I don't think
 OpenStack is an exception in Open Source.
 
 It was the community norm when I showed up, so it's the norm that I take
 forward.
 
 The alternative when I got started wasn't even that discussions were
 happening in open IRC, it was that they were happening via completely
 private back channels, often in physical hallways of individual
 companies. IRC was a ton more open than that for sure. And it was a
 transition that people used to physical conversations could make easier
 than moving to email.
 
  So while I agree, I'd personally get a ton more done if I didn't make
  myself available to answer questions or help sort out misunderstandings
  people were having with things I'm an expert in, doing so would
  definitely detrimentally impact the project as a whole. So I find it an
  unfortunate decision for a core team member.
  
  It is up to each individual to decide how they can maximise their
  contribution to the project. I'm still more than happy to answer
  questions in reviews, or via email, and will join IRC meetings where
  there is an important topic that directly needs my input. I simply
  feel that I can maximise the value of my contribution to the project
  without being on IRC getting direct pings all the time, when the
  overwhealming majority of those pings can be easily dealt with via
  email or gerrit.
 
 Definitely true, to each his/her own. I still consider it unfortunate.
 I've also heard core developers state that they stopped reading the
 mailing list months ago. Which I also find unfortunate.

Unfortunate is putting it mildly.

The #1 issue we have in this project is communicating with each other
about changes that will affect the way the whole project works. We've
put new processes in place over the last year for formalizing reviews of
designs, but that's only one tool among many that we use. The mailing
list is important specifically because it's less rigidly structured, so
conversations can happen more freely. We're too big of a group for any
individual to expect us to seek them out to make sure their voice is
heard. It no doubt makes life easier to shut out all of the noise of
projects you're not interested in, but if you're not participating,
you're going to be left out.

Doug

 
   -Sean
 
 -- 
 Sean Dague
 

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Nikola Đipanov's message of 2015-02-11 05:26:47 -0800:
 On 02/11/2015 02:13 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
  
  If core team members start dropping off external IRC where they are
  communicating across corporate boundaries, then the local tribal effects
  start taking over. You get people start talking about the upstream as
  them. The moment we get into us vs. them, we've got a problem.
  Especially when the upstream project is them.
  
 
 A lot of assumptions being presented as fact here.
 
 I believe the technical term for the above is 'slippery slope fallacy'.
 

I don't see that fallacy, though it could descend into that if people
keep pushing in that direction. Where I think Sean did a nice job
stopping short of the slippery slope is that he only identified the step
that is happening _now_, not the next step.

I tend to agree that right now, if core team members are not talking
on IRC to other core members in the open, whether inside or outside
corporate boundaries, then we do see an us vs. them mentality happen.
It's not I think thats the next step. I have personally seen that
happening and will work hard to stop it. I think Sean has probably seen
his share of it too,  as that is what he described in detail without
publicly shaming anyone or any company (well done Sean).

 We can and _must_ do much better than this on this mailing list! Let's
 drag the discussion level back up!

I'm certain we can always improve, and I appreciate you taking the time
to have a Gandalf moment to stop the Balrog of fallacy from  entering
this thread. We seriously can't let the discussion slip down that
slope.. oh wait.

That said, I do want us to talk about uncomfortable things when
necessary. I think this thread is not something where it will be entirely
productive to stay 100% positive throughout. We might just have to use
some negative language along side our positive suggestions to make sure
people have an efficient way to measure their own behavior.

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Amrith Kumar
Stefano,

I was informed (in a private message on IRC) that where I said Twenty First 
amendment I should have said Eighteenth Amendment. The former repealed the 
latter.

My apologies to all who were trying to figure out what I may have meant.

-amrith

P.S. Why I got that in a private message I know not.

| -Original Message-
| From: Amrith Kumar [mailto:amr...@tesora.com]
| Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 12:20 PM
| To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
| Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets
| fight for it
| 
| Stefano,
| 
| You write:
| 
| | This is seriously disturbing.
| |
| | If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private
| | channel, please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we
| | failed as a community at convincing you that an open channel is the
| place to be.
| |
| | No public shaming, please: education first.
| 
| I was going to contact you privately but figured that would be ironic
| given the conversation we're having. So here is my reply to you in the
| open, for all to see and respond.
| 
| Let me begin by saying that I agree with a lot of what Flavio wrote.
| 
| Where he says that decisions and discussions must always be made in the
| open, he is dead-on.
| 
| Where he says that decisions in private are bad, he is dead-on.
| 
| I beg to differ however on the subject of discussions in private
| (emphasis: discussions, not decisions). Now that sounds bad but let's
| leave private IRC channels aside.
| 
| If you and I had a phone call, that's not a bad thing. What is bad if we
| colluded in some way, and made a decision that we then foisted on the
| community as a done deal.
| 
| IRC is a great thing and so is the mailing list. And a lot of
| conversations are well suited for those mediums. And I read them regularly
| and I find them useful. However, I will admit that there are times when I
| just pick up the phone and call a colleague or call some other ATC in
| OpenStack.
| 
| As Flavio says in his email:
| 
| |  ## Keep discussions open
| | 
| |  I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
| |  discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
| |  there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
| |  HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
| |  discussions sufficient.
| 
| Further, there are in fact times when members of a core team can have
| meaningful discussions about things. Security related bugs are one, on
| occasion things like people's conduct (when it is marginal) and I can make
| a list of a couple of more things easily, but I think you see the point.
| 
| Given time-zones, long distance costs, and the like, IRC is a good option
| as is a private skype call or skype IM. Not everything is suitable for
| IRC/mailing list and a public forum. And in some cases since a public IRC
| channel with three parallel conversations going can be noisy, a less
| cluttered private conversation is invaluable.
| 
| Mostly, I'm very happy to see Flavio's email which ends with this:
| 
|  All the above being said, I'd like to thank everyone who fights for
|  the openness of our community and encourage everyone to make that a
|  must have thing in each sub-community. You don't need to be core-
| reviewer or PTL to do so. Speak up and help keeping the community as open
| as possible.
| 
| Open decision making and discussion are absolutely the lifeblood of an
| open source community. And I agree, as an ATC I will fight for the open
| discussion and decision making. In equal measure, I recognize that I'm
| human and there are times when a quiet sidebar with someone, either on
| the telephone, or over a glass of suitable beverage can go further and
| quicker than any extent of public conversation with the exact same
| participants.
| 
| You write:
| 
| | This is seriously disturbing.
| 
| Yes, what would be seriously disturbing would be if there were decisions
| being made without the open/public scrutiny.
| 
| There seems to be a leap-of-faith that a private IRC channel implies
| covert decisions and therefore they should be shutdown. OK, great, the
| Twenty-First Amendment took the same point of view, see how well that
| worked out.
| 
| I assure you that later today, tomorrow, and the next day, I will have
| private conversations with other ATC's. Some will be on the telephone, and
| some will be on public IRC channels with some totally unique name that
| you'd never know to guess. But, I will try my best to, and I welcome the
| feedback when people feel that I deviate from the norm of ensuring public,
| open discussion and decision making where all are invited to participate.
| 
| Personally, I think the focus on password protected IRC channels is a
| distraction from the real issue that we need to ensure that the rapidly
| growing community is one where public discussion and decision making are
| still

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Ben Nemec
 discussions are almost never necessary in
my experience.  I've seriously considered requesting that anyone who
PM's me just take it to a public IRC channel.  Why?  Even if I really am
the only person on the internet who can answer a question (unlikely ;-),
having my answer out in public may be helpful to someone else.  In many
cases there are also other people in a public channel who might know
something about the topic and be able provide useful input.  Making a
discussion private severely limits both the people who benefit from it
and the people who can contribute to it.

Obviously there are exceptions to that - a ping to revisit a review
doesn't necessarily need to be in a public channel, but then that isn't
really a discussion either so I'm not sure it's the sort of thing we're
talking about here.  And if that ping turns into a discussion of my
review comments then it does belong in public IMHO.

-Ben

 
 -amrith
 
 --
 
 Amrith Kumar, CTO Tesora (www.tesora.com)
 
 Twitter: @amrithkumar  
 IRC: amrith @freenode 
 I work on OpenStack Trove (#openstack-trove)
 
 
 
 | -Original Message-
 | From: Stefano Maffulli [mailto:stef...@openstack.org]
 | Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 9:15 AM
 | To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 | Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets
 | fight for it
 | 
 | On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 10:55 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
 |  This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 | 
 | It's good to have a reminder every now and then. Thank you Flavio for
 | caring enough to notice bad patterns and for raising a flag.
 | 
 |  ## Keep discussions open
 | 
 |  I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 |  discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 |  there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 |  HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 |  discussions sufficient.
 | [...]
 | 
 | Well said. Conversations can happen anywhere and any time, but they should
 | stay in open and accessible channels. Consensus needs to be built and
 | decisions need to be shared, agreed upon by the community at large (and
 | mailing lists are the most accessible media we have).
 | 
 | That said, it's is very hard to generalize and I'd rather deal/solve
 | specific examples. Sometimes, I'm sure there are episodes when a fast
 | decision was needed and a limited amount of people had to carry the burden
 | of responsibility. Life is hard, software development is hard and general
 | rules sometimes need to be adapted to the reality. Again, too much
 | generalization here for what I'm confortable with.
 | 
 | Maybe it's worth repeating that I'm personally (and in my role) available
 | to listen and mediate in cases when communication seems to happen behind
 | closed doors. If you think something unhealthy is happening, talk to me
 | (confidentiality assured).
 | 
 |  ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 | 
 |  I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 |  hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions.
 | 
 | Not sure I agree with the causality but, the facts are those: traffic on
 | the list and on IRC is very high (although not increasing anymore [1][2]).
 | 
 |   I
 |  don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 |  to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 |  happen.
 | 
 | Email is hard, I have the feeling that the vast majority of people use bad
 | (they all suck, no joke) email clients. Lots and lots of email is even
 | worse. Most contributors commit very few patches: the investment for them
 | to configure their MUA to filter our traffic is too high.
 | 
 | I have added more topics today to the openstack-dev list[3]. Maybe,
 | besides filtering on the receiving end, we may spend some time explaining
 | how to use mailman topics? I'll draft something on Ask, it may help those
 | that have limited interest in OpenStack.
 | 
 | What else can we do to make things better?
 | 
 |  ## Cores are *NOT* special
 | 
 |  At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
 |  changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
 |  a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
 |  that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
 |  protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
 | 
 | This is seriously disturbing.
 | 
 | If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
 | please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as a
 | community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.
 | 
 | No public shaming, please: education first.
 | 
 | Cheers,
 | stef
 | 
 | 
 | [1] http://activity.openstack.org/dash/browser/mls.html
 | [2] http://activity.openstack.org/dash/browser/irc.html
 | [3] thanks to Luigi Toscano for highlighting some missing ones

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Ben Nemec
On 02/11/2015 04:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
 On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:55:18AM +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
 Greetings all,

 During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
 things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
 to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
 these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
 concerns.

 Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume
 such when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make
 names and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to
 point based on the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll
 mention below know that I'm talking to them.

 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.

 ## Keep discussions open

 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
 discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
 went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
 good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
 don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
 that you had enough consensus.
 
 With the timezones of our worldwide contributors it is pretty much
 guaranteed that any realtime phone call will have excluded a part
 of our community.
 
 Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at
 the very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a
 community of people who *care* about the project they're working on.
 This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
 sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a
 private discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details
 of such discussion and bring that person up to date, which means the
 discussion will basically start again... from scratch.
 
 I can see that if people have reached an impass in discussions via
 email or irc, it is sometimes helpful to have a call to break a
 roadblock. I absolutely agree though that the results of any such
 calls should not be presented as a final decision. At the very least
 it is neccessary to describe the rationale for the POV obtained as
 a result of the call, and give the broader community the opportunity
 to put forward counterpoints if required. We should certainly not
 just say 'its good to go' and +A sommething based on a private call.
 
 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.
 
 Again, timezones. It is a physical impossibility for most people to
 be on IRC for more than 8 hours a day, so that's only 1/3 of the day
 that any signle person will likely be on IRC.  And no, expecting
 people to have a permanently connected IRC proxy and then read the
 other 16 hours of logs each morning is not a solution.
 
 Personally I've stopped joining IRC most the time regardless, because
 I feel I am far more productive when I'm not being interrupted with
 IRC pings every 20 minutes. There should be few things so urgent that
 they can't be dealt with over email. Again because of our timezone
 differences we should be wary of making important decisions in a
 rush - anything remotely non-trivial should have at least a 24 hour
 window to allow people on all timezones a chance to see the point
 and join in discussion.
 
 If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
 most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
 mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
 with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
 that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
 list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
 your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*

 Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
 We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
 advantage of it?
 
 There are alot of IRC meetings that take place in the project:
 
   https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings
 
 and alot of decisions get made in these meetings. Very rarely do
 the decisions ever get disseminated to the mailing lists. We seem
 to rely on the fact that we have IRC logs of the meetings as a way
 to communicate what took place.
 
 If you have ever tried to regularly read through IRC logs of
 meetings that last an hour or more, it should be clear that this
 is an 

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-02-11 09:20:34 -0800 (-0800), Clint Byrum wrote:
[...]
 That said, I do want us to talk about uncomfortable things when
 necessary. I think this thread is not something where it will be
 entirely productive to stay 100% positive throughout. We might
 just have to use some negative language along side our positive
 suggestions to make sure people have an efficient way to measure
 their own behavior.

Well said. Also, if there are people on this list who feel like
discussions here sometimes get negative or uncomfortable, I'm happy
to point you to free software community mailing lists (more than I
can count on all my fingers and toes) whose day-to-day interactions
make the worst of our flame wars (if you can even call them that)
look like a gradeschool holiday pageant by comparison. I'm regularly
surprised by how positive and civil we manage to keep things in our
corner of the free software world.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Gary Kotton

On 2/11/15, 3:26 PM, Nikola Đipanov ndipa...@redhat.com wrote:

On 02/11/2015 02:13 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
 
 If core team members start dropping off external IRC where they are
 communicating across corporate boundaries, then the local tribal effects
 start taking over. You get people start talking about the upstream as
 them. The moment we get into us vs. them, we've got a problem.
 Especially when the upstream project is them.
 

A lot of assumptions being presented as fact here.

I believe the technical term for the above is 'slippery slope fallacy'.

We can and _must_ do much better than this on this mailing list! Let's
drag the discussion level back up!

+1

The discussion should be on how to keep things collaborative and open.



N.

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 10:55 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.

It's good to have a reminder every now and then. Thank you Flavio for
caring enough to notice bad patterns and for raising a flag. 

 ## Keep discussions open
 
 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. 
[...]

Well said. Conversations can happen anywhere and any time, but they
should stay in open and accessible channels. Consensus needs to be built
and decisions need to be shared, agreed upon by the community at large
(and mailing lists are the most accessible media we have). 

That said, it's is very hard to generalize and I'd rather deal/solve
specific examples. Sometimes, I'm sure there are episodes when a fast
decision was needed and a limited amount of people had to carry the
burden of responsibility. Life is hard, software development is hard and
general rules sometimes need to be adapted to the reality. Again, too
much generalization here for what I'm confortable with.

Maybe it's worth repeating that I'm personally (and in my role)
available to listen and mediate in cases when communication seems to
happen behind closed doors. If you think something unhealthy is
happening, talk to me (confidentiality assured).

 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 
 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions.

Not sure I agree with the causality but, the facts are those: traffic on
the list and on IRC is very high (although not increasing anymore
[1][2]).

  I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.

Email is hard, I have the feeling that the vast majority of people use
bad (they all suck, no joke) email clients. Lots and lots of email is
even worse. Most contributors commit very few patches: the investment
for them to configure their MUA to filter our traffic is too high.

I have added more topics today to the openstack-dev list[3]. Maybe,
besides filtering on the receiving end, we may spend some time
explaining how to use mailman topics? I'll draft something on Ask, it
may help those that have limited interest in OpenStack.

What else can we do to make things better?

 ## Cores are *NOT* special
 
 At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
 changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
 a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
 that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
 protected, irc channels for core reviewers.

This is seriously disturbing.

If you're one of those core reviewers hanging out on a private channel,
please contact me privately: I'd love to hear from you why we failed as
a community at convincing you that an open channel is the place to be.

No public shaming, please: education first.

Cheers,
stef


[1] http://activity.openstack.org/dash/browser/mls.html
[2] http://activity.openstack.org/dash/browser/irc.html
[3] thanks to Luigi Toscano for highlighting some missing ones


__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Sean Dague
On 02/11/2015 09:02 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
 On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:13:05AM -0500, Sean Dague wrote:
 On 02/11/2015 05:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.

 Again, timezones. It is a physical impossibility for most people to
 be on IRC for more than 8 hours a day, so that's only 1/3 of the day
 that any signle person will likely be on IRC.  And no, expecting
 people to have a permanently connected IRC proxy and then read the
 other 16 hours of logs each morning is not a solution.

 Personally I've stopped joining IRC most the time regardless, because
 I feel I am far more productive when I'm not being interrupted with
 IRC pings every 20 minutes. There should be few things so urgent that
 they can't be dealt with over email. Again because of our timezone
 differences we should be wary of making important decisions in a
 rush - anything remotely non-trivial should have at least a 24 hour
 window to allow people on all timezones a chance to see the point
 and join in discussion.

 IRC is mostly not about discussions, it's about discussion, context,
 team building, and trust. And it's a cross organization open forum for that.

 If core team members start dropping off external IRC where they are
 communicating across corporate boundaries, then the local tribal effects
 start taking over. You get people start talking about the upstream as
 them. The moment we get into us vs. them, we've got a problem.
 Especially when the upstream project is them.
 
 It is perfectly possible to communicate effectively over email. Pretty
 much every single other open source project I've ever contributed to
 works almost exclusively over email without their being corporate tribal
 effects. OpenStack is really the exception here with its obsession on
 using IRC for so much communication.

My experiences have been different. While a lot of projects mirrored the
kernel process which was all mailing list, most of the projects I've
worked on that haven't been written in C are far more IRC driven.

Every time I've had to address an issue with a non OpenStack python
dependency, it's been IRC to get things done, not a mailing list. Most
of these projects don't have mailing lists. A lot of people come to
OpenStack from those sorts of project cultures. So I don't think
OpenStack is an exception in Open Source.

It was the community norm when I showed up, so it's the norm that I take
forward.

The alternative when I got started wasn't even that discussions were
happening in open IRC, it was that they were happening via completely
private back channels, often in physical hallways of individual
companies. IRC was a ton more open than that for sure. And it was a
transition that people used to physical conversations could make easier
than moving to email.

 So while I agree, I'd personally get a ton more done if I didn't make
 myself available to answer questions or help sort out misunderstandings
 people were having with things I'm an expert in, doing so would
 definitely detrimentally impact the project as a whole. So I find it an
 unfortunate decision for a core team member.
 
 It is up to each individual to decide how they can maximise their
 contribution to the project. I'm still more than happy to answer
 questions in reviews, or via email, and will join IRC meetings where
 there is an important topic that directly needs my input. I simply
 feel that I can maximise the value of my contribution to the project
 without being on IRC getting direct pings all the time, when the
 overwhealming majority of those pings can be easily dealt with via
 email or gerrit.

Definitely true, to each his/her own. I still consider it unfortunate.
I've also heard core developers state that they stopped reading the
mailing list months ago. Which I also find unfortunate.

-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital 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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Brian Curtin
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Jeremy Stanley fu...@yuggoth.org wrote:
 Also, if there are people on this list who feel like
 discussions here sometimes get negative or uncomfortable, I'm happy
 to point you to free software community mailing lists (more than I
 can count on all my fingers and toes) whose day-to-day interactions
 make the worst of our flame wars (if you can even call them that)
 look like a gradeschool holiday pageant by comparison.

If people feel it's a negative or uncomfortable environment, find out
why and try to do something to improve it. Telling someone that there
are worse options out there is the opposite of fostering an open
community.

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2015-02-11 14:06:23 -0600 (-0600), Brian Curtin wrote:
 If people feel it's a negative or uncomfortable environment, find
 out why and try to do something to improve it. Telling someone
 that there are worse options out there is the opposite of
 fostering an open community.

Fair point--I was merely agreeing that sometimes in an effort to
keep the community healthy it's necessary to discuss topics which
may make some participants uncomfortable and may escalate into
heated debate. I certainly didn't mean to imply that we should
endeavor to be more like any other particular community, only that
we shouldn't be afraid to do so when it's required (and that we're
decidedly tame when we do, compared to a lot of other possible
examples).
-- 
Jeremy Stanley

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Thierry Carrez
Flavio Percoco wrote:
 During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
 things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
 to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
 these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
 concerns.
 
 Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume
 such when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make
 names and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to
 point based on the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll
 mention below know that I'm talking to them.
 
 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 
 ## Keep discussions open
 
 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
 discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
 went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
 good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
 don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
 that you had enough consensus.
 
 Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at
 the very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a
 community of people who *care* about the project they're working on.
 This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
 sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a
 private discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details
 of such discussion and bring that person up to date, which means the
 discussion will basically start again... from scratch.

+100

 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 
 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.
 
 If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
 most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
 mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
 with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
 that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
 list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
 your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*
 
 Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
 We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
 advantage of it?

+1

 ## Cores are *NOT* special
 
 At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
 changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
 a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
 that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
 protected, irc channels for core reviewers.

If those exist, I think they should die in a fire. I'm fine with the TC
passing a resolution so that such channels are opened. Private channels
where real decisions are made are pretty contrary to our ideal of open
development.

 This is the point where my good faith assumption skill falls short.
 Seriously, don't get me wrong but: WHAT IN THE ACTUAL F**K?
 
 THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING PRIVATE FOR CORE REVIEWERS* TO
 DISCUSS.
 
 If anything core reviewers should be the ones *FORCING* - it seems
 that *encouraging* doesn't have the same effect anymore - *OPENNESS* in
 order to include other non-core members in those discussions.
 
 Remember that the core flag is granted because of the reviews that
 person has provided and because that individual *WANTS* to be part of
 it. It's not a prize for people. In fact, I consider core reviewers to
 be volunteers and their job is infinitely thanked.

+1000

Core reviewing has always be designed to be a duty, not a badge. There
has been a trends toward making it a badge, with some companies giving
bonuses to core reviewers, and HP making +2 pins and throwing +2
parties. I think that's a significant mistake and complained about it,
but then my influence only goes that far.

The problem with special rights (like +2) is that if you don't actively
resist it, they naturally turn into an aristocracy (especially when only
existing cores vote on new cores). That aristocracy then usually turns
into a clique which is excluding new blood and new opinions, and then
that project slowly dies.

Thanks Flavio for this timely reminder.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
__
OpenStack Development 

[openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Flavio Percoco

Greetings all,

During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
concerns.

Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume
such when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make
names and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to
point based on the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll
mention below know that I'm talking to them.

This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.

## Keep discussions open

I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
that you had enough consensus.

Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at
the very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a
community of people who *care* about the project they're working on.
This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a
private discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details
of such discussion and bring that person up to date, which means the
discussion will basically start again... from scratch.

## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
happen.

If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*

Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
advantage of it?

## Cores are *NOT* special

At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
protected, irc channels for core reviewers.

This is the point where my good faith assumption skill falls short.
Seriously, don't get me wrong but: WHAT IN THE ACTUAL F**K?

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING PRIVATE FOR CORE REVIEWERS* TO
DISCUSS.

If anything core reviewers should be the ones *FORCING* - it seems
that *encouraging* doesn't have the same effect anymore - *OPENNESS* in
order to include other non-core members in those discussions.

Remember that the core flag is granted because of the reviews that
person has provided and because that individual *WANTS* to be part of
it. It's not a prize for people. In fact, I consider core reviewers to
be volunteers and their job is infinitely thanked.

Since, All generalizations are false, including this one. - Mark
Twain, I'm pretty sure there are folks that disagree with the above.
If you do, I care about your thoughts. This is worth discussing and
fighting for.

All the above being said, I'd like to thank everyone who fights for
the openness of our community and encourage everyone to make that a
must have thing in each sub-community. You don't need to be
core-reviewer or PTL to do so. Speak up and help keeping the community
as open as possible.

Cheers,
Flavio

--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco


pgpTvB183mNNf.pgp
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:55:18AM +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
 Greetings all,
 
 During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
 things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
 to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
 these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
 concerns.
 
 Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume
 such when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make
 names and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to
 point based on the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll
 mention below know that I'm talking to them.
 
 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 
 ## Keep discussions open
 
 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
 discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
 went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
 good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
 don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
 that you had enough consensus.

With the timezones of our worldwide contributors it is pretty much
guaranteed that any realtime phone call will have excluded a part
of our community.

 Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at
 the very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a
 community of people who *care* about the project they're working on.
 This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
 sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a
 private discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details
 of such discussion and bring that person up to date, which means the
 discussion will basically start again... from scratch.

I can see that if people have reached an impass in discussions via
email or irc, it is sometimes helpful to have a call to break a
roadblock. I absolutely agree though that the results of any such
calls should not be presented as a final decision. At the very least
it is neccessary to describe the rationale for the POV obtained as
a result of the call, and give the broader community the opportunity
to put forward counterpoints if required. We should certainly not
just say 'its good to go' and +A sommething based on a private call.

 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 
 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.

Again, timezones. It is a physical impossibility for most people to
be on IRC for more than 8 hours a day, so that's only 1/3 of the day
that any signle person will likely be on IRC.  And no, expecting
people to have a permanently connected IRC proxy and then read the
other 16 hours of logs each morning is not a solution.

Personally I've stopped joining IRC most the time regardless, because
I feel I am far more productive when I'm not being interrupted with
IRC pings every 20 minutes. There should be few things so urgent that
they can't be dealt with over email. Again because of our timezone
differences we should be wary of making important decisions in a
rush - anything remotely non-trivial should have at least a 24 hour
window to allow people on all timezones a chance to see the point
and join in discussion.

 If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
 most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
 mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
 with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
 that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
 list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
 your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*
 
 Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
 We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
 advantage of it?

There are alot of IRC meetings that take place in the project:

  https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings

and alot of decisions get made in these meetings. Very rarely do
the decisions ever get disseminated to the mailing lists. We seem
to rely on the fact that we have IRC logs of the meetings as a way
to communicate what took place.

If you have ever tried to regularly read through IRC logs of
meetings that last an hour or more, it should be clear that this
is an awful way to communicate info with people who weren't there.

I think communication 

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Kuvaja, Erno
 -Original Message-
 From: Flavio Percoco [mailto:fla...@redhat.com]
 Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 9:55 AM
 To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
 Subject: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight
 for it
 
 Greetings all,
 
 During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the things I 
 love
 the most about this community are degrading and moving to a state that I
 personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing these things improve, I'm
 taking the time today to share one of my concerns.
 
 Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume such
 when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make names
 and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to point based on
 the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll mention below know that
 I'm talking to them.
 
 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 
 ## Keep discussions open
 
 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some discussions in
 private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe there's anything wrong in
 having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private discussions, if
 you've discussed a spec privately and right after you went upstream and said:
 This has been discussed in a call and it's good to go, I beg you to stop 
 for 2
 seconds and reconsider that. I don't believe you were able to fit all the
 community in that call and that you had enough consensus.

++
 
 Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at the
 very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a community of
 people who *care* about the project they're working on.
 This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
 sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a private
 discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details of such 
 discussion
 and bring that person up to date, which means the discussion will basically
 start again... from scratch.

And when they do come and ask for clarification do not just state that this was 
discussed and agreed already.
 
 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 
 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is hard and 
 time
 consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I don't think there's
 anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong to expect *EVERYONE* to
 be in the IRC channel when those discussions happen.
 
 If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of most of
 your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the mailing list as
 oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting with time zones.
 Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something that should go to the
 mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing list and don't be afraid of 
 having
 a bigger community chiming in in your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*
 
 Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
 We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
 advantage of it?

This is tough call ... ~ real time communication is just so much more 
efficient. You can get things done in minutes that would take hours  days to 
deal with over e-mail. It also does not help that the -dev mailing list is 
really crowded, the tags are not consistent (sorry for finger pointing but oslo 
seems to be specially inconsistent with some tagging [oslo] some tagging 
[oslo.something] etc. Please keep that [oslo] there ;D ).

I would not discourage people to use irc or other communication means, just 
being prepared to answer those questions again.
 
 ## Cores are *NOT* special
 
 At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
 changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became a
 thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know that some
 projects even have private (flagged with +s), password protected, irc
 channels for core reviewers.
 
 This is the point where my good faith assumption skill falls short.
 Seriously, don't get me wrong but: WHAT IN THE ACTUAL F**K?
 
 THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING PRIVATE FOR CORE REVIEWERS*
 TO DISCUSS.

Here I do disagree. There is stuff called private bugs for security etc. that 
_should_ kept private. Again speeds up progress hugely when the discussion does 
not need to happen in Launchpad and it keeps the bug itself cleaner as well. I 
do agree that there should not be secret society making common decisions behind 
closed doors, but there is reasons to keep some details initially between 
closed group only. And most commonly that closed group seems to be cores.
 
 If anything core reviewers should be the ones *FORCING* - it seems that
 *encouraging* doesn't have the same effect anymore - *OPENNESS* in
 order to include other

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Chris Dent

On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Flavio Percoco wrote:


During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
concerns.


Thanks for writing this. I agree with pretty much everything you say,
especially the focus on the mailing list being only truly available
and persistent medium we have for engaging everyone. Yes it is noisy
and takes work, but it is an important part of the work.

I'm not certain, but I have an intuition that many of the suboptimal
and moving-in-the-direction-of-closed behaviors that you're describing
are the result of people trying to cope with having too much to do
with insufficient tools. Technology projects often sacrifice the
management of information in favor of what's believed to be the core
task (making stuff?) when there are insufficient resources.

This is unfortunate because the effective sharing and management of
information is the fuel that drives, optimizes and corrects the entire
process and thus leads to more effective making of stuff.

This thread and many of the threads going around lately speak a lot
about people not being able to participate in a way that lets them
generate the most quality -- either because there's insufficient time
and energy to move the mountain or because each move they make opens
up another rabbit hole.

As many have said this is not sustainable.

Many of the proposed strategies or short term tactics involve trying to
hack the system so that work that is perceived to be extraneous is
removed or made secondary. This won't fix it.

I think it is time we recognize and act on the fact that the corporate
landlords that pay many of us to farm on this land need to provide more
resources. This will help to ensure the health of semi-artifical
opensource ecology that is OpenStack. At the moment many things are
packed tight with very little room to breathe. We need some air.

--
Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent
https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Nikola Đipanov
+ Inf for writing this Flavio!

Only some observations below.

On 02/11/2015 10:55 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
 Greetings all,
 
 During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
 things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
 to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
 these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
 concerns.
 
 Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume
 such when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make
 names and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to
 point based on the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll
 mention below know that I'm talking to them.
 
 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 
 ## Keep discussions open
 
 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
 discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
 went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
 good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
 don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
 that you had enough consensus.
 
 Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at
 the very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a
 community of people who *care* about the project they're working on.
 This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
 sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a
 private discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details
 of such discussion and bring that person up to date, which means the
 discussion will basically start again... from scratch.
 
 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 
 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.
 
 If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
 most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
 mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
 with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
 that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
 list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
 your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*
 
 Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
 We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
 advantage of it?
 

I think the above 2 are somewhat intertwined with another trend in the
community I've personally noticed towards the end of the Juno cycle,
that I also strongly believe needs to DIAFF.

An idea that it is possible to manage and open source community using
similar methods that are commonly used for managing subordinates in a
corporate hierarchy.

There are other (somewhat less) horrible examples around, and they all
came about as a (IMHO knee jerk) response to explosive growth, and they
all need to stop.

I urge people who are seen as leaders in their respective projects to
stop and think the next time they want to propose a policy change or a
process - ask yourself Is there an OSS project that does something
similar successfully, or have I seen this from our old PM? and then not
propose it if the answer is clearly that this will help the distributed
workflow of an OSS community.

On 02/11/2015 11:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
 This is the point where my good faith assumption skill falls short.
 Seriously, don't get me wrong but: WHAT IN THE ACTUAL F**K?

 THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING PRIVATE FOR CORE REVIEWERS* TO
 DISCUSS.

 If anything core reviewers should be the ones *FORCING* - it seems
 that *encouraging* doesn't have the same effect anymore - *OPENNESS* in
 order to include other non-core members in those discussions.

 Remember that the core flag is granted because of the reviews that
 person has provided and because that individual *WANTS* to be part of
 it. It's not a prize for people. In fact, I consider core reviewers to
 be volunteers and their job is infinitely thanked.

 +1000

 Core reviewing has always be designed to be a duty, not a badge. There
 has been a trends toward making it a badge, with some companies giving
 bonuses to core reviewers, and HP making +2 pins and throwing +2
 parties. I think that's a significant mistake and complained about it,
 but then my influence only goes that far.

 The problem with special rights (like +2) is that if you don't 

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Flavio Percoco

On 11/02/15 11:31 +, Kuvaja, Erno wrote:

## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is hard and time
consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I don't think there's
anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong to expect *EVERYONE* to
be in the IRC channel when those discussions happen.

If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of most of
your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the mailing list as
oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting with time zones.
Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something that should go to the
mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing list and don't be afraid of 
having
a bigger community chiming in in your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*

Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
advantage of it?


This is tough call ... ~ real time communication is just so much more efficient. 
You can get things done in minutes that would take hours  days to deal with 
over e-mail.


As I mentioned, I don't think there's anything wrong with a quick chat
fo sort small issues out that don't have a huge impact on the project.
However, those communications shouldn't be considered the ultimate
decision for things that will happen in the project.

A good example is the #openstack-glance channe, which you decided to
leave since we enabled logging. If we need to discuss something
outside the meeting - or start a discussion that simple won't fit in a
meeting - I'd need to choose between IRC discussions or mailing list.
I'll obviously choose the mailing list because I would hate it to
reach a consensus without listenting to your thoughts.

If m-l is not used, you'll likely share your opinion and that *WILL*
slow down the process anyway - a discussion that should've followed a
different path.


It also does not help that the -dev mailing list is really crowded, the tags 
are not consistent (sorry for finger pointing but oslo seems to be specially 
inconsistent with some tagging [oslo] some tagging [oslo.something] etc. Please 
keep that [oslo] there ;D ).


In the case of oslo.messaging, we do this because we actually have
different groups depending on the project. We have a oslo-core team
and a oslo.messaging-core team. This encourages contributions on
topics that folks care about.

I don't think there's anything bad about that, just use filters.


I would not discourage people to use irc or other communication means, just 
being prepared to answer those questions again.


I'm discouraging the usage of IRC as the *main* communication channel.
I really hope no one, across the gazillion of projects I'm part of, is
expecting me to be present at every time on every channel (although I
am thanks to ZNC). That's phisically impossible, hence emails.



## Cores are *NOT* special

At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became a
thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know that some
projects even have private (flagged with +s), password protected, irc
channels for core reviewers.

This is the point where my good faith assumption skill falls short.
Seriously, don't get me wrong but: WHAT IN THE ACTUAL F**K?

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING PRIVATE FOR CORE REVIEWERS*
TO DISCUSS.


Here I do disagree. There is stuff called private bugs for security etc. that 
_should_ kept private. Again speeds up progress hugely when the discussion does 
not need to happen in Launchpad and it keeps the bug itself cleaner as well. I 
do agree that there should not be secret society making common decisions behind 
closed doors, but there is reasons to keep some details initially between 
closed group only. And most commonly that closed group seems to be cores.


Note that my complain is about private core channels used for general
discussion. However, since you've brought the CVE thing up, lemme
disagree with you. CVE discussions should be kept in the LP bug as
well.

Do you want to have a quick chat with someone about a bug? Sure, go
ahead. Afterwards, you MUST get back to the LP bug and provide the
feedback there. Otherwise, you just broke the process and other folks
that weren't part of that conversation will be out.

Also, must core-sec teams have some core members in them but not *all*
of them, which means the super secure core channel is just bullshit.
Random channels with obscured names created in a per-bug basis would
be even more secure than the super secure channel with +s and password
protected (yes, I just made this up).



If anything core reviewers should be the ones *FORCING* - it seems that
*encouraging* doesn't have the same effect anymore - *OPENNESS* in
order to include other non-core members in those discussions.

Remember that the core flag is granted because of 

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Chris Dent

On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Chris Dent wrote:


I think it is time we recognize and act on the fact that the corporate
landlords that pay many of us to farm on this land need to provide more
resources.


In case it wasn't clear, by this I don't mean project managers and
other styles of enterprisey hoopaa joop. I mean more testing rigs
and more supported community members.

--
Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent
https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Kashyap Chamarthy
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:53:24PM +0100, Nikola Đipanov wrote:
 + Inf for writing this Flavio!

Absolutely! I never even knew such things existed in this community.

 Only some observations below.
 
[. . .]

  ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
  
  I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
  hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
  don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
  to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
  happen.
  
  If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
  most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
  mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
  with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
  that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
  list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
  your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*
  
  Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
  We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
  advantage of it?
  
 
 I think the above 2 are somewhat intertwined with another trend in the
 community I've personally noticed towards the end of the Juno cycle,
 that I also strongly believe needs to DIAFF.
 
 An idea that it is possible to manage and open source community using
 similar methods that are commonly used for managing subordinates in a
 corporate hierarchy.

That intention/notion to let's manage the community like a team just as
we do at good old $company should be absolutely demolished! People who
advocate such behavior are using ridiculously outdated brain models and
should drop what they're doing immediately and do some introspection.


-- 
/kashyap

__
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] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Sean Dague
On 02/11/2015 04:55 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
 Greetings all,
 
 During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
 things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
 to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
 these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
 concerns.
 
 Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume
 such when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make
 names and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to
 point based on the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll
 mention below know that I'm talking to them.
 
 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.
 
 ## Keep discussions open
 
 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
 discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
 went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
 good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
 don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
 that you had enough consensus.
 
 Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at
 the very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a
 community of people who *care* about the project they're working on.
 This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
 sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a
 private discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details
 of such discussion and bring that person up to date, which means the
 discussion will basically start again... from scratch.
 
 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel
 
 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.
 
 If you are discussing something on IRC that requires the attention of
 most of your project's community, I highly recommend you to use the
 mailing list as oppose to pinging everyone independently and fighting
 with time zones. Using IRC bouncers as a replacement for something
 that should go to the mailing list is absurd. Please, use the mailing
 list and don't be afraid of having a bigger community chiming in in
 your discussion.  *THAT'S A GOOD THING*
 
 Changes, specs, APIs, etc. Everything is good for the mailing list.
 We've fought hard to make this community grow, why shouldn't we take
 advantage of it?
 
 ## Cores are *NOT* special
 
 At some point, for some reason that is unknown to me, this message
 changed and the feeling of core's being some kind of superheros became
 a thing. It's gotten far enough to the point that I've came to know
 that some projects even have private (flagged with +s), password
 protected, irc channels for core reviewers.
 
 This is the point where my good faith assumption skill falls short.
 Seriously, don't get me wrong but: WHAT IN THE ACTUAL F**K?
 
 THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING PRIVATE FOR CORE REVIEWERS* TO
 DISCUSS.

I'm kind of floored to find out that password protected irc channels
exist. That actually violates our base tenants of being an OpenStack
project, so is grounds for removing the project from OpenStack.

 If anything core reviewers should be the ones *FORCING* - it seems
 that *encouraging* doesn't have the same effect anymore - *OPENNESS* in
 order to include other non-core members in those discussions.
 
 Remember that the core flag is granted because of the reviews that
 person has provided and because that individual *WANTS* to be part of
 it. It's not a prize for people. In fact, I consider core reviewers to
 be volunteers and their job is infinitely thanked.
 
 Since, All generalizations are false, including this one. - Mark
 Twain, I'm pretty sure there are folks that disagree with the above.
 If you do, I care about your thoughts. This is worth discussing and
 fighting for.
 
 All the above being said, I'd like to thank everyone who fights for
 the openness of our community and encourage everyone to make that a
 must have thing in each sub-community. You don't need to be
 core-reviewer or PTL to do so. Speak up and help keeping the community
 as open as possible.
 
 Cheers,
 Flavio
 
 
 
 __
 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
 


-- 
Sean Dague

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Sean Dague
On 02/11/2015 05:52 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
 On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:55:18AM +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:
 Greetings all,

 During the last two cycles, I've had the feeling that some of the
 things I love the most about this community are degrading and moving
 to a state that I personally disagree with. With the hope of seeing
 these things improve, I'm taking the time today to share one of my
 concerns.

 Since I believe we all work with good faith and we *all* should assume
 such when it comes to things happening in our community, I won't make
 names and I won't point fingers - yes, I don't have enough fingers to
 point based on the info I have. People that fall into the groups I'll
 mention below know that I'm talking to them.

 This email is dedicated to the openness of our community/project.

 ## Keep discussions open

 I don't believe there's anything wrong about kicking off some
 discussions in private channels about specs/bugs. I don't believe
 there's anything wrong in having calls to speed up some discussions.
 HOWEVER, I believe it's *completely* wrong to consider those private
 discussions sufficient. If you have had that kind of private
 discussions, if you've discussed a spec privately and right after you
 went upstream and said: This has been discussed in a call and it's
 good to go, I beg you to stop for 2 seconds and reconsider that. I
 don't believe you were able to fit all the community in that call and
 that you had enough consensus.
 
 With the timezones of our worldwide contributors it is pretty much
 guaranteed that any realtime phone call will have excluded a part
 of our community.
 
 Furthermore, you should consider that having private conversations, at
 the very end, doesn't help with speeding up discussions. We've a
 community of people who *care* about the project they're working on.
 This means that whenever they see something that doesn't make much
 sense, they'll chime in and ask for clarification. If there was a
 private discussion on that topic, you'll have to provide the details
 of such discussion and bring that person up to date, which means the
 discussion will basically start again... from scratch.
 
 I can see that if people have reached an impass in discussions via
 email or irc, it is sometimes helpful to have a call to break a
 roadblock. I absolutely agree though that the results of any such
 calls should not be presented as a final decision. At the very least
 it is neccessary to describe the rationale for the POV obtained as
 a result of the call, and give the broader community the opportunity
 to put forward counterpoints if required. We should certainly not
 just say 'its good to go' and +A sommething based on a private call.
 
 ## Mailing List vs IRC Channel

 I get it, our mailing list is freaking busy, keeping up with it is
 hard and time consuming and that leads to lots of IRC discussions. I
 don't think there's anything wrong with that but I believe it's wrong
 to expect *EVERYONE* to be in the IRC channel when those discussions
 happen.
 
 Again, timezones. It is a physical impossibility for most people to
 be on IRC for more than 8 hours a day, so that's only 1/3 of the day
 that any signle person will likely be on IRC.  And no, expecting
 people to have a permanently connected IRC proxy and then read the
 other 16 hours of logs each morning is not a solution.
 
 Personally I've stopped joining IRC most the time regardless, because
 I feel I am far more productive when I'm not being interrupted with
 IRC pings every 20 minutes. There should be few things so urgent that
 they can't be dealt with over email. Again because of our timezone
 differences we should be wary of making important decisions in a
 rush - anything remotely non-trivial should have at least a 24 hour
 window to allow people on all timezones a chance to see the point
 and join in discussion.

IRC is mostly not about discussions, it's about discussion, context,
team building, and trust. And it's a cross organization open forum for that.

If core team members start dropping off external IRC where they are
communicating across corporate boundaries, then the local tribal effects
start taking over. You get people start talking about the upstream as
them. The moment we get into us vs. them, we've got a problem.
Especially when the upstream project is them.

So while I agree, I'd personally get a ton more done if I didn't make
myself available to answer questions or help sort out misunderstandings
people were having with things I'm an expert in, doing so would
definitely detrimentally impact the project as a whole. So I find it an
unfortunate decision for a core team member.

-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Lets keep our community open, lets fight for it

2015-02-11 Thread Nikola Đipanov
On 02/11/2015 02:13 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
 
 If core team members start dropping off external IRC where they are
 communicating across corporate boundaries, then the local tribal effects
 start taking over. You get people start talking about the upstream as
 them. The moment we get into us vs. them, we've got a problem.
 Especially when the upstream project is them.
 

A lot of assumptions being presented as fact here.

I believe the technical term for the above is 'slippery slope fallacy'.

We can and _must_ do much better than this on this mailing list! Let's
drag the discussion level back up!

N.

__
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