I'm fairly certain the buzzing sound I can hear is a bee in my bonnet... so
I suspect that I'm starting to sound like someone chasing a bee that only
they can hear. I'm not sure if it's helpful to keep this discussion on this
list - would there be a better forum somewhere else?
On Fri, Aug 29,
James Polley wrote:
However, Thierry pointed
to https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/Structure
which
still refers to Project Technical Leads and says explicitly that they
lead individual projects, not programs. I actually have edit access to
James Polley wrote:
Point of clarification: I've heard PTL=Project Technical Lead
and PTL=Program Technical Lead. Which is it? It is kind of
important as OpenStack grows, because the first is responsible
for *a* project, and the second is responsible for all
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org
wrote:
James Polley wrote:
Point of clarification: I've heard PTL=Project Technical Lead
and PTL=Program Technical Lead. Which is it? It is kind of
important as OpenStack grows, because the
On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Anne Gentle a...@openstack.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober
rochelle.gro...@huawei.com wrote:
/flame-on
Ok, this is funny to some of us in the community. The general populace
of this community is so against the idea
OK, now that we have evacuated the terminology issue (we'll use liaison
or janitor or secretary, not czar), and side-stepped the offtopic
development (this is not about suppressing PTLs, just a framework to let
them delegate along predetermined lines if they want to)... which of
those unnamed
On 08/26/2014 11:13 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
OK, now that we have evacuated the terminology issue (we'll use liaison
or janitor or secretary, not czar), and side-stepped the offtopic
development (this is not about suppressing PTLs, just a framework to let
them delegate along predetermined
On Aug 26, 2014, at 5:13 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
OK, now that we have evacuated the terminology issue (we'll use liaison
or janitor or secretary, not czar), and side-stepped the offtopic
development (this is not about suppressing PTLs, just a framework to let
them
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 8:19 PM, John Dickinson m...@not.mn wrote:
I think Anne makes some excellent points about the pattern being proposed
being unlikely to be commonly implemented across all the programs (or, at
best, very difficult). Let's not try to formalize another best practice
that
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [ptls] The Czar system, or how to scale
PTLs
On 08/23/2014 06:35 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
I agree as well. PTL is a servant of the community, as any good
leader is. If the PTL feels they have to drop the hammer, or if an
impass is reached where they are asked
On Aug 26, 2014, at 10:10 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 8:19 PM, John Dickinson m...@not.mn wrote:
I think Anne makes some excellent points about the pattern being proposed
being unlikely to be commonly implemented across all the programs (or, at
best,
On 08/26/2014 05:13 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
OK, now that we have evacuated the terminology issue (we'll use liaison
or janitor or secretary, not czar), and side-stepped the offtopic
development (this is not about suppressing PTLs, just a framework to let
them delegate along predetermined
On 08/26/2014 10:04 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Aug 26, 2014, at 5:13 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
OK, now that we have evacuated the terminology issue (we'll use liaison
or janitor or secretary, not czar), and side-stepped the offtopic
development (this is not about
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:04:41AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Aug 26, 2014, at 5:13 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
OK, now that we have evacuated the terminology issue (we'll use liaison
or janitor or secretary, not czar), and side-stepped the offtopic
development
On Aug 26, 2014, at 11:28 AM, Matthew Treinish mtrein...@kortar.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:04:41AM -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
On Aug 26, 2014, at 5:13 AM, Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org wrote:
OK, now that we have evacuated the terminology issue (we'll use liaison
or
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [ptls] The Czar system, or how to scale PTLs
On 08/23/2014 06:35 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
I agree as well. PTL is a servant of the community, as any good
leader is. If the PTL feels they have to drop the hammer, or if an
impass is reached where they are asked
Anne Gentle wrote:
Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
/flame-on
Let's call spades, spades here. Czar is not only overkill, but the
wrong metaphor.
/flame-off
I'm with Rocky on the anti-czar-as-a-word camp. We all like clever names
to shed the corporate stigma but this word
Zane Bitter wrote:
On 22/08/14 12:45, Dolph Mathews wrote:
I'm all for getting a final decision, but a 'final' decision that
has been
imposed from outside rather than internalised by the participants is...
rarely final.
The expectation of a PTL isn't to stomp around and make final
Tim Bell wrote:
As part of the user feedback loop, we've found the PTL role extremely useful
to channel feedback. The operator PTL discussions during the Atlanta summit
helped to clarify a number of areas where the PTL can then take the points
back to the design summit. It is not clear how
On 08/25/2014 12:30 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Zane Bitter wrote:
On 22/08/14 12:45, Dolph Mathews wrote:
I'm all for getting a final decision, but a 'final' decision that
has been
imposed from outside rather than internalised by the participants is...
rarely final.
The expectation of a PTL
On 22/08/14 21:02, Anne Gentle wrote:
I'm with Rocky on the anti-czar-as-a-word camp. We all like clever names to
shed the corporate stigma but this word ain't it. Liaison or lead?
+1. The only time you hear the word 'czar' in regular life (outside of
references to pre-revolutionary Russia)
On Aug 23, 2014, at 6:35 PM, Clint Byrum cl...@fewbar.com wrote:
Excerpts from Dolph Mathews's message of 2014-08-22 09:45:37 -0700:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com wrote:
On 22/08/14 11:19, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Zane Bitter wrote:
On 22/08/14 08:33,
Zane Bitter wrote:
On 22/08/14 21:02, Anne Gentle wrote:
I'm with Rocky on the anti-czar-as-a-word camp. We all like clever
names to
shed the corporate stigma but this word ain't it. Liaison or lead?
+1. The only time you hear the word 'czar' in regular life (outside of
references to
On 2014-08-25 19:39:30 + (+), Rochelle.RochelleGrober wrote:
Or, how about Secretary?
[...]
While we're painting this particular bike shed, I have a preference
for janitor, drudge, mule, valet, slogger or similar terms
which make it apparent that there is nothing at all glamorous nor
On Mon 25 Aug 2014 03:38:18 PM CDT, Zane Bitter wrote:
I'd say we've done fairly well, but I would attribute that at least in
part to the fact that we've treated the PTL as effectively the
temporary release management contact more than the guy who will
resolve disputes for us. In other words,
Zane Bitter [August 25, 2014 1:38 PM] wrote:
. . .
snip
I'd say we've done fairly well, but I would attribute that at least in
part to the fact that we've treated the PTL as effectively the
temporary
release management contact more than the guy who will resolve
disputes for us. In other
On 08/22/2014 08:19 PM, John Dickinson wrote:
I think Anne makes some excellent points about the pattern being
proposed being unlikely to be commonly implemented across all the
programs (or, at best, very difficult). Let's not try to formalize
another best practice that works many times and
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 02:33:27PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
[Snip some well articulated thoughts.]
Enter the Czar system: each project should have a number of liaisons /
official contacts / delegates that are fully responsible to cover one
aspect of the project. We need to have Bugs
On 08/23/2014 06:35 PM, Clint Byrum wrote:
I agree as well. PTL is a servant of the community, as any good leader
is. If the PTL feels they have to drop the hammer, or if an impass is
reached where they are asked to, it is because they have failed to get
everyone communicating effectively, not
On 08/22/2014 09:02 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:
/flame-on
Let's call spades, spades here. Czar is not only overkill, but
the wrong metaphor.
/flame-off
I'm with Rocky on the anti-czar-as-a-word camp. We all like clever
names to shed the corporate stigma but this word ain't it.
-Original Message-
From: John Dickinson [mailto:m...@not.mn]
Sent: 23 August 2014 03:20
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [ptls] The Czar system, or how to scale
PTLs
I think Anne makes some excellent points about
Excerpts from Dolph Mathews's message of 2014-08-22 09:45:37 -0700:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Zane Bitter zbit...@redhat.com wrote:
On 22/08/14 11:19, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Zane Bitter wrote:
On 22/08/14 08:33, Thierry Carrez wrote:
We also
still need someone to have the
On 08/22/2014 08:33 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hi everyone,
We all know being a project PTL is an extremely busy job. That's because
in our structure the PTL is responsible for almost everything in a project:
- Release management contact
- Work prioritization
- Keeping bugs under control
On 08/22/2014 09:40 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
Another area worth calling out is a gate czar. Having someone who
understands infra and QA quite well and is regularly on top of the
status of the project in the gate is helpful and quite important.
Oops, you said this one, too. Anyway, +1.
--
On 08/22/2014 07:33 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hi everyone,
We all know being a project PTL is an extremely busy job. That's because
in our structure the PTL is responsible for almost everything in a project:
- Release management contact
- Work prioritization
- Keeping bugs under control
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 02:33:27PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hi everyone,
We all know being a project PTL is an extremely busy job. That's because
in our structure the PTL is responsible for almost everything in a project:
- Release management contact
- Work prioritization
- Keeping
On 08/22/2014 02:33 PM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hi everyone,
We all know being a project PTL is an extremely busy job. That's because
in our structure the PTL is responsible for almost everything in a project:
- Release management contact
- Work prioritization
- Keeping bugs under control
On 22/08/14 08:33, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hi everyone,
We all know being a project PTL is an extremely busy job. That's because
in our structure the PTL is responsible for almost everything in a project:
- Release management contact
- Work prioritization
- Keeping bugs under control
-
Russell Bryant wrote:
On 08/22/2014 09:40 AM, Russell Bryant wrote:
Another area worth calling out is a gate czar. Having someone who
understands infra and QA quite well and is regularly on top of the
status of the project in the gate is helpful and quite important.
Oops, you said this
Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 02:33:27PM +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hi everyone,
We all know being a project PTL is an extremely busy job. That's because
in our structure the PTL is responsible for almost everything in a project:
- Release management contact
- Work
Zane Bitter wrote:
On 22/08/14 08:33, Thierry Carrez wrote:
We also
still need someone to have the final say in case of deadlocked issues.
-1 we really don't.
I know we disagree on that :)
People say we don't have that many deadlocks in OpenStack for which the
PTL ultimate power is
On Fri, 2014-08-22 at 11:01 -0400, Zane Bitter wrote:
I don't see that as something the wider OpenStack community needs to
dictate. We have a heavyweight election process for PTLs once every
cycle because that used to be the process for electing the TC. Now that
it no longer serves this
On 08/22/2014 08:33 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hi everyone,
We all know being a project PTL is an extremely busy job. That's because
in our structure the PTL is responsible for almost everything in a project:
- Release management contact
- Work prioritization
- Keeping bugs under control
-
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote:
On 08/22/2014 08:33 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Hi everyone,
We all know being a project PTL is an extremely busy job. That's because
in our structure the PTL is responsible for almost everything in a
project:
- Release
On 22/08/14 12:45, Dolph Mathews wrote:
I'm all for getting a final decision, but a 'final' decision that has been
imposed from outside rather than internalised by the participants is...
rarely final.
The expectation of a PTL isn't to stomp around and make final decisions,
it's to step in when
/flame-on
Ok, this is funny to some of us in the community. The general populace of this
community is so against the idea of management that they will use the term for
a despotic dictator as a position name rather than manager. Sorry, but this
needed to be said.
/flame-off
Specific comments
On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Rochelle.RochelleGrober
rochelle.gro...@huawei.com wrote:
/flame-on
Ok, this is funny to some of us in the community. The general populace of
this community is so against the idea of management that they will use the
term for a despotic dictator as a
I think Anne makes some excellent points about the pattern being proposed being
unlikely to be commonly implemented across all the programs (or, at best, very
difficult). Let's not try to formalize another best practice that works many
times and force it to work every time. Here's an alternate
48 matches
Mail list logo
