Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for all candidates in TC election: What will you do if you don't win?

[Emilien Macchi]

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Amrith Kumar  wrote:
> Full disclosure, I'm running for election as well. I intend to also
> provide an answer to the question I pose here, one that I've posed
> before on #openstack-tc in an office hours session.
>
> Question 1:
>
> "There are M open slots for the TC and there are N (>>M) candidates
> for those open slots. This is a good problem to have, no doubt.
> Choice, is a good thing, enthusiasm and participation are good things.
>
> But clearly, (N-M) candidates will not be elected.
>
> If you are one of those (N-M) candidates, what then? What do you
> believe you can do if you are not elected to the TC, and what will you
> do? (concrete examples would be good)"

I always plan to work on the same things as usual, I'm not rage quitting :-)
The only thing as a TC member is that you can actually vote in
Governance changes. All the rest is about your influence in our
community, and I already explained what my focus has been until now
and what it would be in the near future.

> Question 2:
>
> "If you are one of the M elected candidates, the N-M candidates who
> were not elected represent a resource?
>
> Would you look to leverage/exploit that resource, and if so, how?
> (concrete examples would be good)"
>
> -amrith
>
> __
> 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



-- 
Emilien Macchi

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for all candidates in TC election: What will you do if you don't win?

[Lance Bragstad]

On 10/16/2017 09:09 AM, Amrith Kumar wrote:
> In a recent conversation on #openstack-tc where we bemoaned the ills
> of Stackalytics and related management-by-objectives to Heisenberg's
> uncertainty principle, the conversation (on 10-03, for example) veered
> towards why people were interested in running for election to the
> Technical Committee.
>
> The observation was made that one motivation may be that an
> individual's employer derives some benefit from having a member on the
> technical committee. That would explain why some people (in the N-M,
> the ones who don't get elected) do not remain actively involved in the
> work of the TC if they are not elected. Some days later, I went and
> eyeballed the people who have run for TC elections over the past four
> cycles and then looked at what many of them did after the election, on
> the mailing list, and on the governance repository, and I think there
> is some truth to the observation.
>
> I've never been elected to the TC, I have run for election several
> times. Not winning the election has not in any way diminished my
> desire or drive to participate in the governance of OpenStack. Not
> winning has merely given me the (little more) luxury of not feeling so
> bad if I don't make it to the TC meeting (RIP), or not making it to as
> many of the office hours as I can. It has meant that I don't feel
> compelled to attend the TC meeting that precedes the Summit, and where
> possible I have made an effort to do so.
>
> In my mind winning or not winning merely changes one thing; do you get
> an actual vote that is counted towards a decision, on something that
> is put before the TC.
>
> Now, the question is this; does the vote really matter? I'm really
> happy with one thing that the TC has done over the years I've known of
> it; few (if any) decisions were actually made on a small margin of
> votes. Whether you have a vote, or not, participation has always been
> welcomed, and you get to say your piece. Never have I felt that not
> having a vote has made my opinion second class in any way.
>
>> If you are one of those (N-M) candidates, what then? What do you
>> believe you can do if you are not elected to the TC, and what will you
>> do? (concrete examples would be good)"
> I will still attend the office hours, I will still give dims grief and
> say that I preferred the regular TC meetings to office hours, I will
> still make time to get involved in more activities like the SWG and in
> the coming year if I have an opportunity to do that, I will. work to
> revive the SWG as a SIG. All of these are things (including giving
> dims a hard time) are things I've been doing already. I will continue
> to live by the decisions of the TC and I will continue to work to make
> OpenStack a better solution for me, a user of OpenStack.
>
>> "If you are one of the M elected candidates, the N-M candidates who
>> were not elected represent a resource?
> One thing that I have suggested in the past was the notion of
> alternates. For good reasons it was decided not to go this route but a
> similar benefit could in fact be achieved if the TC was able to tap
> these candidates to take on special projects, or drive specific
> initiatives. It is here that the issue of time came up; would people
> not elected be able to spare the time to do these kinds of things, and
> would their employers permit them the time to do it. I submit to you
> that while this is a reality, if in fact employers are not able to
> permit people the time to do these kinds of things if not elected, I
> submit to you that the motivations for running for election are flawed
> in the first place.
>
> Today, the responsibility to run too many of our "projects" are
> falling back on members of the TC, I'm thinking of Doug, Sean, Monty,
> ... I would try and leverage the N-M if at all possible to make for a
> stronger bench of leaders in the years to come.

Especially since we're starting to incorporate "champions" for the
community-wide goals we accept. I think championing a goal is a great
way to support the TC while improving one's own understanding of
OpenStack as a platform.

>
>
> -amrith
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Paul Belanger  wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 08:15:51AM -0400, Amrith Kumar wrote:
>>> Full disclosure, I'm running for election as well. I intend to also
>>> provide an answer to the question I pose here, one that I've posed
>>> before on #openstack-tc in an office hours session.
>>>
>>> Question 1:
>>>
>>> "There are M open slots for the TC and there are N (>>M) candidates
>>> for those open slots. This is a good problem to have, no doubt.
>>> Choice, is a good thing, enthusiasm and participation are good things.
>>>
>>> But clearly, (N-M) candidates will not be elected.
>>>
>>> If you are one of those (N-M) candidates, what then? What do you
>>> believe you can do if you are not elected to the TC, and what will you
>>> do? (concrete examples would 

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for all candidates in TC election: What will you do if you don't win?

[Doug Hellmann]

Excerpts from Amrith Kumar's message of 2017-10-15 08:15:51 -0400:
> Full disclosure, I'm running for election as well. I intend to also
> provide an answer to the question I pose here, one that I've posed
> before on #openstack-tc in an office hours session.
> 
> Question 1:
> 
> "There are M open slots for the TC and there are N (>>M) candidates
> for those open slots. This is a good problem to have, no doubt.
> Choice, is a good thing, enthusiasm and participation are good things.
> 
> But clearly, (N-M) candidates will not be elected.
> 
> If you are one of those (N-M) candidates, what then? What do you
> believe you can do if you are not elected to the TC, and what will you
> do? (concrete examples would be good)"
> 
> Question 2:
> 
> "If you are one of the M elected candidates, the N-M candidates who
> were not elected represent a resource?
> 
> Would you look to leverage/exploit that resource, and if so, how?
> (concrete examples would be good)"
> 
> -amrith
> 

If I'm not elected, I will still be working on all of the things I
mentioned in my nomination email (docs, encouraging participation from
folks who are <100% upstream, identifying new leaders and helping them
up their game, etc.) [1].

Regardless of the outcome of the election, I will be looking for
help with those things from everyone else who is running. We need a
leader for the proposed welcoming SIG [2], in particular.

Doug

[1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-October/123059.html
[2] 
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-sigs/2017-September/84.html

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for all candidates in TC election: What will you do if you don't win?

[Amrith Kumar]

In a recent conversation on #openstack-tc where we bemoaned the ills
of Stackalytics and related management-by-objectives to Heisenberg's
uncertainty principle, the conversation (on 10-03, for example) veered
towards why people were interested in running for election to the
Technical Committee.

The observation was made that one motivation may be that an
individual's employer derives some benefit from having a member on the
technical committee. That would explain why some people (in the N-M,
the ones who don't get elected) do not remain actively involved in the
work of the TC if they are not elected. Some days later, I went and
eyeballed the people who have run for TC elections over the past four
cycles and then looked at what many of them did after the election, on
the mailing list, and on the governance repository, and I think there
is some truth to the observation.

I've never been elected to the TC, I have run for election several
times. Not winning the election has not in any way diminished my
desire or drive to participate in the governance of OpenStack. Not
winning has merely given me the (little more) luxury of not feeling so
bad if I don't make it to the TC meeting (RIP), or not making it to as
many of the office hours as I can. It has meant that I don't feel
compelled to attend the TC meeting that precedes the Summit, and where
possible I have made an effort to do so.

In my mind winning or not winning merely changes one thing; do you get
an actual vote that is counted towards a decision, on something that
is put before the TC.

Now, the question is this; does the vote really matter? I'm really
happy with one thing that the TC has done over the years I've known of
it; few (if any) decisions were actually made on a small margin of
votes. Whether you have a vote, or not, participation has always been
welcomed, and you get to say your piece. Never have I felt that not
having a vote has made my opinion second class in any way.

> If you are one of those (N-M) candidates, what then? What do you
> believe you can do if you are not elected to the TC, and what will you
> do? (concrete examples would be good)"

I will still attend the office hours, I will still give dims grief and
say that I preferred the regular TC meetings to office hours, I will
still make time to get involved in more activities like the SWG and in
the coming year if I have an opportunity to do that, I will. work to
revive the SWG as a SIG. All of these are things (including giving
dims a hard time) are things I've been doing already. I will continue
to live by the decisions of the TC and I will continue to work to make
OpenStack a better solution for me, a user of OpenStack.

> "If you are one of the M elected candidates, the N-M candidates who
> were not elected represent a resource?

One thing that I have suggested in the past was the notion of
alternates. For good reasons it was decided not to go this route but a
similar benefit could in fact be achieved if the TC was able to tap
these candidates to take on special projects, or drive specific
initiatives. It is here that the issue of time came up; would people
not elected be able to spare the time to do these kinds of things, and
would their employers permit them the time to do it. I submit to you
that while this is a reality, if in fact employers are not able to
permit people the time to do these kinds of things if not elected, I
submit to you that the motivations for running for election are flawed
in the first place.

Today, the responsibility to run too many of our "projects" are
falling back on members of the TC, I'm thinking of Doug, Sean, Monty,
... I would try and leverage the N-M if at all possible to make for a
stronger bench of leaders in the years to come.


-amrith



On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Paul Belanger  wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 08:15:51AM -0400, Amrith Kumar wrote:
>> Full disclosure, I'm running for election as well. I intend to also
>> provide an answer to the question I pose here, one that I've posed
>> before on #openstack-tc in an office hours session.
>>
>> Question 1:
>>
>> "There are M open slots for the TC and there are N (>>M) candidates
>> for those open slots. This is a good problem to have, no doubt.
>> Choice, is a good thing, enthusiasm and participation are good things.
>>
>> But clearly, (N-M) candidates will not be elected.
>>
>> If you are one of those (N-M) candidates, what then? What do you
>> believe you can do if you are not elected to the TC, and what will you
>> do? (concrete examples would be good)"
>>
> ++
>
> I'd like to see (N-M) candidates continue with TC by helping support M.
> Personally, I plan on participating more in TC office hours regardless of
> results. Or even reach out to TC and ask what non-TC members could do to help 
> TC
> more.
>
> Once thing I've noticed in the question period before elections was 'What more
> could the TC do'. I think it is also valid that we look at it the 

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for all candidates in TC election: What will you do if you don't win?

[Paul Belanger]

On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 08:15:51AM -0400, Amrith Kumar wrote:
> Full disclosure, I'm running for election as well. I intend to also
> provide an answer to the question I pose here, one that I've posed
> before on #openstack-tc in an office hours session.
> 
> Question 1:
> 
> "There are M open slots for the TC and there are N (>>M) candidates
> for those open slots. This is a good problem to have, no doubt.
> Choice, is a good thing, enthusiasm and participation are good things.
> 
> But clearly, (N-M) candidates will not be elected.
> 
> If you are one of those (N-M) candidates, what then? What do you
> believe you can do if you are not elected to the TC, and what will you
> do? (concrete examples would be good)"
>
++

I'd like to see (N-M) candidates continue with TC by helping support M.
Personally, I plan on participating more in TC office hours regardless of
results. Or even reach out to TC and ask what non-TC members could do to help TC
more.

Once thing I've noticed in the question period before elections was 'What more
could the TC do'. I think it is also valid that we look at it the other way
around as 'What more could the non-TC member do' like Amrith asks above.

> Question 2:
> 
> "If you are one of the M elected candidates, the N-M candidates who
> were not elected represent a resource?
> 
> Would you look to leverage/exploit that resource, and if so, how?
> (concrete examples would be good)"
> 
Yah, I'd love to see 'pair programming' style for TC and non-TC memeber. Clearly
we have interested parties in becoming TC, and I would think the N-M candidates
would also try running again in 6 months.  So why not help those N-M member
become M, just like we do for non-core / core members on OpenStack projects.

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

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Doug Hellmann]

Excerpts from Ed Leafe's message of 2017-10-12 13:38:03 -0500:
> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I wish 
> the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what would 
> you have wanted the TC to do about it?
> 
> -- Ed Leafe
> 

The main issue that I have that hasn't been fully addressed over
the last year is with driver teams. We're still working on how best
to address that situation, and I hope we'll have it resolved over the
next term.

Doug

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Doug Hellmann]

Excerpts from Paul Belanger's message of 2017-10-12 23:13:11 -0400:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:42:46PM -0700, Clay Gerrard wrote:
> > I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
> > other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect me
> > and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the
> > social groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to consider
> > voting records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
> > 
> > To candidates:
> > 
> > Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> > https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where
> > they thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> > explain why you think so?
> > 
> > It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
> > 
> > -Clay
> 
> 2017-05-30 Guidelines for Managing Releases of Binary Artifacts [1].
> 
> It would have to be 469265[2] that Doug Hellmann proposed after the OpenStack
> Summit in Boston. There has been a lot of passionate people in the community
> that have been asking for containers, specifically docker in this case.
> 
> Regardless of what side you are in the debate of container vs VM, together as 
> a
> community we had discussions on what the guideline would look like.
> Individually, each project had a specific notion of what publishing containers
> would look like, but the TC help navigate some of the technical issues around
> binary vs source releasing, versioning and branding (to name a few).
> 
> While there is still work to be done on getting the publishing pipeline
> finalized, I like to think the interested parties in binary artifacts are 
> happy
> we now have governance in place.
> 
> [1] 
> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/resolutions/20170530-binary-artifacts.rst
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/469265/
> 

Thanks for highlighting that one, Paul. I agree that was a particularly
good outcome. Everyone involved listened to each other, came to a
common understanding of both the technical and social issues involved,
and worked on the resulting wording together. And it all happened
relatively quickly, too, given how contentious it seemed like it
was going to be at the outset.

Doug

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Amrith Kumar]

Clay,

Great question and one that made me think quite a bit. I believe that
while the commits in the Governance repo represent the visible actions
of the TC, the real leadership ability of the TC is often in the
actions that it inspires in people in the community. The TC is a body
that has to lead without any real authority over the individuals that
they lead, which makes it a very interesting form of leadership.

To the specific reviews, I'll pick three [1], [2] and [3]. Let me explain.

The first is a commit that I authored for the governance repository to
formalize the creation of the Stewardship Working Group (SWG). This
group then drove the discussions around the TC Vision which is the
subject of the third review. I'm very thankful for the leadership and
drive that Collette Alexander brought in getting a number of us
together in Detroit to meet and discuss where the TC was and where it
should be going. I was lucky to be one of the non-TC participants at
that meeting and worked with the group that later created the TC
vision which was also well discussed in the community.

The second is another review that I proposed that relates to the
maintenance-mode tag for projects to reflect (accurately) to deployers
and users (collectively to customers) the state of projects that are
not actively being developed.

You explicitly said that "actions speak louder ...", so let me
highlight that the reviews that I cite are ones that I either authored
or participated actively in.

Thanks for the question.

-amrith

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/337895/
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/449925/
[3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453262/

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:42 PM, Clay Gerrard  wrote:
> I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
> other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect me
> and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the social
> groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to consider voting
> records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
>
> To candidates:
>
> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where they
> thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> explain why you think so?
>
> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
>
> -Clay
>
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Andrea Frittoli]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 7:38 PM Ed Leafe  wrote:

> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I
> wish the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what
> would you have wanted the TC to do about it?
>

I really appreciate the work that the TC has done with the vision and the
community goals.
The TC is applying the ideas of servant leadership, which are a very good
fit with OpenStack guiding principles [0].

I wish the TC would be more proactive in propagating the ideas of servant
leadership and vision into the project teams - and help the PTLs be servant
leaders for their project teams.

Faithfully,

Andrea Frittoli (andreaf)

[0]
https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/principles.html#guiding-principles



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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Andrea Frittoli]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 8:43 PM Clay Gerrard  wrote:

> I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
> other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect me
> and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the
> social groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to consider
> voting records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
>
> To candidates:
>
> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where
> they thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> explain why you think so?
>

The TC proposes and votes governance patches; however its real power, or
better, responsibility, is to inspire, to provide guidance by building
trust first, to work in the community for the community.
I think the TC vision work [0] was a great example of all three. The draft
has been proposed by the TC. Is has been discussed with the community and
everyone had a chance to contribute to it.

I very much appreciated the work on the guiding principles [1] and on the
meetings [2] as well.
The vision was special in the way the community was even more involved than
in the others.

Faithfully,

Andrea Frittoli (andreaf)

[0]
https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20170404-vision-2019.html
[1]
https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/principles.html#guiding-principles

[2]
https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20170718-allow-scheduling-meetings-on-team-channels.html


>
> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
>
> -Clay
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Julia Kreger]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Clay Gerrard  wrote:
[trim]
> To candidates:
>
> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where they
> thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> explain why you think so?

The one thing that really sticks out to me is the vision statement [1]
by the TC.
Not just because such things are scary, but that the process to reach
a vision really
forces the entire group to reach a mutual understanding. I think that
the exercise of
writing the vision was worthwhile, largely because one can't see where
one is going,
without understanding where one is presently.

[1]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453262

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Ildiko Vancsa]

By being involved in training activities and on-boarding new contributors to 
our community I would like to join to Emilien on his point.

I think we have a great, open and welcoming community already, but we still 
have many areas to improve. Teaching the new community members the processes 
and tools is essential and also the easier part.

The difficulty starts when they start to actively contribute to a project and 
they need to understand the mission, scope, architecture and dynamics of it to 
become a team member longer term and take on responsibilities. With smaller 
projects it is usually easier, while the more complex projects can be 
challenging both for the new team members and the core team.

With smaller groups we get back to a discussion periodically about encouraging 
the teams to do more mentoring and also about mentoring the mentors as we have 
a few experienced people and teams with good examples already. In my view the 
TC can help with putting emphasis on encouraging this mentality and direction 
besides looking into metrics.

Thanks and Best Regards,
Ildikó
(IRC: ildikov)


> On 2017. Oct 12., at 23:22, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Ed Leafe  wrote:
>> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I wish 
>> the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what would 
>> you have wanted the TC to do about it?
> 
> I've been part of the TC during the past year (first time) but I still
> have an answer to that question.
> There is one thing I wish the TC would do more is to encourage
> projects to grow and empower trust in certain projects.
> Beside technical things, we want an healthy community and grow
> developer's knowledge so OpenStack can be a better place to
> contribute. I think some projects are doing well but some of them
> might need some mentoring on that front (maybe from some TC members).
> For example, I'm thinking about the way some projects handle core
> reviewers elections and their metrics used to do so. I think the TC
> might ensure that healthy metrics and discussion happen, so projects
> can scale.
> 
> I'm happy to answer questions on that topic.
> 
> Thanks Ed for this first question :-)
> -- 
> Emilien Macchi
> 
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Julia Kreger]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Ed Leafe  wrote:
> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I wish 
> the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what would 
> you have wanted the TC to do about it?

There have been some great replies thus far, possibly the best so far
is Emilien's reply.

That being said, I have felt like many of our problems are
fundamentally a lack of trust.
I don't think it is a misplaced lack of trust, but more sub-optimal
behaviors that have
impacted the way we work in order to maintain control. In reality none
of us are really
"in control." All we can do is try to row in the same general
direction in order to reach
a mutually agreeable outcome.

I would like to see the TC encourage reflection upon the path taken by
each project
for mutual understandings of mission and direction to be reached
inside of each project.
Hopefully through that, we can build trust, and possibly undo some of
the negative impact
that highly focused agendas have had on our 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] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[ChangBo Guo]

One thing I wish the TC could do more in the past years is that make users
and developers in the same page:
share requirements, pain points and  development progress, glad we have
some ways to shorten the feedback loop like
building SIG(Special Interest Group) to involve more users.

2017-10-13 2:38 GMT+08:00 Ed Leafe :

> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I
> wish the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what
> would you have wanted the TC to do about it?
>
> -- Ed Leafe
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __
> 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
>



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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Graham Hayes]

There is one topic I have been pretty vocal about wanting the TC to deal
with - encouraging cross project teams (Docs / QA etc) to start
migrating to providing tooling, rather than direct services to projects.

I am aware I am (re)opening a can of worms, but I think as a community
we have started to move in this direction already (see: Docs, Zuul v3).


On 12/10/17 19:38, Ed Leafe wrote:
> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I wish 
> the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what would 
> you have wanted the TC to do about it?
> 
> -- Ed Leafe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 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
> 



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] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[ChangBo Guo]

Several changes seems very well in the past months,  for me  the "top 5
help wanted list" [1] is really helpful.

It's introduced in [2] and with some follow ups.  This document lists areas
where the OpenStack Technical Committee seeks contributions to
significantly help OpenStack as a whole. In last several cycles some key
contributors changed their work,
not focus on OpenStack, in the other side, some new contributors couldn't
find 'the right way' to contribute, posting trivial repeated patches, The
document provides a guidance on how to make useful, strategic contributions
to OpenStack. It's important for new contributors,even key contributors.

[1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/top-5-help-wanted.html
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/466684/

2017-10-13 3:42 GMT+08:00 Clay Gerrard :

> I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
> other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect me
> and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the
> social groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to consider
> voting records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
>
> To candidates:
>
> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where
> they thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> explain why you think so?
>
> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
>
> -Clay
>
> __
> 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
>
>


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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Graham Hayes]

For me "Write down OpenStack principles" [1] signaled the start of an
more open TC. It was writing down principles that I had been told about
verbally when I started working on OpenStack, and had been part of a
"shared understanding" for some people who had been in the community for
a while.

This change solidified them, and put them somewhere we could reference
and highlight new community members.

The follow up patchsets of [2],[3],[4],[5] started to let the community
principles evolve based on things like the Leadership training.

[6] made me happy, as it had been such a long time in the making, and it
represented a community decision, not a TC top down one.

Great question!

- Graham


1 -
https://github.com/openstack/governance/commit/f019d697c6b26a00f4693331b00db9124d91f92e

2 -
https://github.com/openstack/governance/commit/c55816bde73d5085aba70d370577074fbae3016a

3 -
https://github.com/openstack/governance/commit/21041fe8c638e5af4387a5f40184f5f73717e506

4 -
https://github.com/openstack/governance/commit/ec481cb3e1ff88e2d36f72fd9b282e4cc0f015c7

5 -
https://github.com/openstack/governance/commit/ebcfcb6609629967b9e515b9615d8998efd6cbd4


6 -
https://github.com/openstack/governance/commit/9ad8f55ce8c8556fd702059fc8ad90d3b8b0de3f

On 12/10/17 20:42, Clay Gerrard wrote:
> I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
> other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect
> me and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the
> social groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to
> consider voting records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
> 
> To candidates:
> 
> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where
> they thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good
> and explain why you think so?
> 
> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
> 
> -Clay
> 
> 
> __
> 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
> 



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] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Ildiko Vancsa]

Hi All,

I agree with the items pointed out in the previous mails in the thread.

In my view the discussion on the vision was crucial in order to synchronize on 
what we think OpenStack is and to understand what direction we would like it to 
move and how we keep it an innovative environment that fits into the ecosystem 
around. It is also important to revisit the mission time to time and shape it 
to how the technology and ecosystem around us evolves.

The discussion about new languages is also pointing towards being inclusive and 
diverse in technology which is a very important step to keep OpenStack current 
and flexible and to support the integration engine nature of it on the way 
forward.

However, to pick my choice, I would like to take a step away from technology 
and mention the decision on dropping the weekly meetings and using the mailing 
list and setting up an IRC channel and office hours for the TC. I think it is 
just as important if not slightly more than the technology itself to be 
critical and innovative with our processes too within the community to ensure 
that we are open and inclusive in practice as well.

This might be one of the reasons to have such good diversity among the 
candidates this time around which shows we are moving to the right direction 
and is also encouraging as we need all the voices and different points of view, 
experience and expertise represented in the technical leadership of our 
community.

Thanks and Best Regards,
Ildikó
(IRC: ildikov)


> On 2017. Oct 13., at 6:49, Swapnil Kulkarni (coolsvap)  
> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:12 AM, Clay Gerrard  wrote:
>> I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
>> other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect me
>> and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the social
>> groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to consider voting
>> records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
>> 
>> To candidates:
>> 
>> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
>> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where they
>> thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
>> explain why you think so?
>> 
>> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
>> 
>> -Clay
>> 
>> __
>> 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
>> 
> 
> I have few of them on my mind.
> 
> Setting up guidelines for managing releases of binary artifacts [1]
> was very important in and key to the hearts of most OpenStack
> operators and everyone who's looking at the next big leap with
> containerized deployment.
> 
> Embracing new languages in OpenStack which are required as dependency
> for certain projects [2] [3] is a very important decision and I would
> really like to see it through. While there is a lot of work to be done
> to get something fully operational in current infrastructure but as we
> will have more contributors who feel the need, we have the background
> work ready for it.
> 
> And of course setting up the vision and mission for TC [4] was one of
> the important things done. There will still be updates to it, but the
> current draft is a piece of work with a diverse community like ours.
> 
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469265/
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/451524/
> [3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/398875/
> [4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453262/
> 
> -- 
> Best Regards,
> Swapnil Kulkarni
> irc : coolsvap
> me at coolsvap dot net
> 
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Swapnil Kulkarni (coolsvap)]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:12 AM, Clay Gerrard  wrote:
> I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
> other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect me
> and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the social
> groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to consider voting
> records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
>
> To candidates:
>
> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where they
> thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> explain why you think so?
>
> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
>
> -Clay
>
> __
> 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
>

I have few of them on my mind.

Setting up guidelines for managing releases of binary artifacts [1]
was very important in and key to the hearts of most OpenStack
operators and everyone who's looking at the next big leap with
containerized deployment.

Embracing new languages in OpenStack which are required as dependency
for certain projects [2] [3] is a very important decision and I would
really like to see it through. While there is a lot of work to be done
to get something fully operational in current infrastructure but as we
will have more contributors who feel the need, we have the background
work ready for it.

And of course setting up the vision and mission for TC [4] was one of
the important things done. There will still be updates to it, but the
current draft is a piece of work with a diverse community like ours.

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/469265/
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/451524/
[3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/398875/
[4] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453262/

-- 
Best Regards,
Swapnil Kulkarni
irc : coolsvap
me at coolsvap dot net

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Paul Belanger]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:42:46PM -0700, Clay Gerrard wrote:
> I like a representative democracy.  It mostly means I get a say in which
> other people I have to trust to think deeply about issues which effect me
> and make decisions which I agree (more or less) are of benefit to the
> social groups in which I participate.  When I vote IRL I like to consider
> voting records.  Actions speak louder blah blah.
> 
> To candidates:
> 
> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where
> they thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> explain why you think so?
> 
> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
> 
> -Clay

2017-05-30 Guidelines for Managing Releases of Binary Artifacts [1].

It would have to be 469265[2] that Doug Hellmann proposed after the OpenStack
Summit in Boston. There has been a lot of passionate people in the community
that have been asking for containers, specifically docker in this case.

Regardless of what side you are in the debate of container vs VM, together as a
community we had discussions on what the guideline would look like.
Individually, each project had a specific notion of what publishing containers
would look like, but the TC help navigate some of the technical issues around
binary vs source releasing, versioning and branding (to name a few).

While there is still work to be done on getting the publishing pipeline
finalized, I like to think the interested parties in binary artifacts are happy
we now have governance in place.

[1] 
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/resolutions/20170530-binary-artifacts.rst
[2] https://review.openstack.org/469265/

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Paul Belanger]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 01:38:03PM -0500, Ed Leafe wrote:
> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I wish 
> the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what would 
> you have wanted the TC to do about it?
> 
> -- Ed Leafe
>
No, I've been happy with how our TC has operated this and previous years. It
doesn't mean I don't agree with everything the TC has done, but I do appreciate
the effort and energy everybody has put in.

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Mohammed Naser]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 10:10 PM, Ed Leafe  wrote:
> On Oct 12, 2017, at 8:10 PM, Mohammed Naser  wrote:
>
>> I think that the OpenStack infrastructure team is doing a wonderful
>> job at keeping such a huge CI system working to the best of their
>> effort, however, I think that there needs to be a stronger
>> relationship between projects and the infrastructure team in order for
>> us to help alleviate some of the load that is on them. There are a lot
>> of moving components from dealing with multiple cloud infrastructure
>> donors, operating two flavours of clouds internally, maintaining the
>> codebase of Zuul and other system administration related tasks.
>
> Thanks for the answer, and I definitely agree. But I don't feel that you 
> answered the important part: what would you have wanted the TC to do about 
> this?

Thanks for responding Ed.

I would propose that the TC should work on a motion and present it to
the OpenStack development community to encourage projects on creating
an infrastructure liaison role.  While I'd understand that the
infrastructure team is quite busy these days, but before working on
setting a motion in place, it would be best to listen more to the
infrastructure team about this sort of concept and how we can bridge
the gap between developers and the infrastructure team.

I don't think the TC's resolution should operate by enforcement but
rather by empowerment, therefore I would hope that the result of this
would be a well documented resolution regarding this subject which
could demonstrate the strong value in adopting this role within
project teams, encouraging teams to find that individual (or many) who
can step up and work together with the infrastructure team.


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

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Ed Leafe]

On Oct 12, 2017, at 8:10 PM, Mohammed Naser  wrote:

> I think that the OpenStack infrastructure team is doing a wonderful
> job at keeping such a huge CI system working to the best of their
> effort, however, I think that there needs to be a stronger
> relationship between projects and the infrastructure team in order for
> us to help alleviate some of the load that is on them. There are a lot
> of moving components from dealing with multiple cloud infrastructure
> donors, operating two flavours of clouds internally, maintaining the
> codebase of Zuul and other system administration related tasks.

Thanks for the answer, and I definitely agree. But I don't feel that you 
answered the important part: what would you have wanted the TC to do about this?

-- Ed Leafe







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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Fei Long Wang]

One thing I wish the TC could do in the past years or so is using their
"power" to help to push a more integrated/collaborative OpenStack.
Though some(all) TC members may think they don't have the power.


On 13/10/17 07:38, Ed Leafe wrote:
> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I wish 
> the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what would 
> you have wanted the TC to do about it?
>
> -- Ed Leafe
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __
> 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

-- 
Cheers & Best regards,
Feilong Wang (王飞龙)
--
Senior Cloud Software Engineer
Tel: +64-48032246
Email: flw...@catalyst.net.nz
Catalyst IT Limited
Level 6, Catalyst House, 150 Willis Street, Wellington
-- 


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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Mohammed Naser]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Ed Leafe  wrote:
> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I wish 
> the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what would 
> you have wanted the TC to do about it?

This is great and the timing of this question is more important than ever.

I think that the OpenStack infrastructure team is doing a wonderful
job at keeping such a huge CI system working to the best of their
effort, however, I think that there needs to be a stronger
relationship between projects and the infrastructure team in order for
us to help alleviate some of the load that is on them. There are a lot
of moving components from dealing with multiple cloud infrastructure
donors, operating two flavours of clouds internally, maintaining the
codebase of Zuul and other system administration related tasks.

I do think that just like how projects have a release liaison, bug
czar, there should be a notion of a infrastructure team liaison.
Often, there are a lot of things going on in the infrastructure side
of things, jobs might be breaking (for infra related and unrelated
reasons), and keeping up with what's going on on the infrastructure
team to report to the project team.

This would help the infrastructure team tremendously by allowing a
much easier communication channel, as well as assist the team in
avoiding being behind on infrastructure updates and suddenly finding
themselves in the red for a while.

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

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Mohammed Naser]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Clay Gerrard  wrote:
> [...]
>
>> To candidates:
>>
>> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
>> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where they
>> thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
>> explain why you think so?
>>
>> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!
>
> The vision exercise was, in my opinion, one of the more exciting
> things we have done in 2017.
> It's not an easy thing to do because of our diverses opinions, but
> together we managed to write something down, propose it to the
> community in the open and make it better afterward (of course this
> will never finish).
>
> Outcome related, I loved the fact we're thinking outside of the
> OpenStack community and see how we can make OpenStack projects usable
> in environments without all the ecosystem. I also like to see our
> strong efforts to increase diversity in all sorts and our work to
> improve community health.
>
> Beside the outcome, I loved to see all TC members able to work
> together on this Vision in the open, I hope we can do more of that in
> the future, even outside of the TC (in teams). (ex: doc team had a PTG
> session about visioning as well).
> I hope I answered the question, please let me know if that's not the
> case if you want more details.

I think Emilien here covers a lot of what I personally agreed with,
however, I'd like to add more about the cloud application mission:

https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/resolutions/20170317-cloud-applications-mission.rst

As we are delivering fundamental building blocks for applications, we
need to make sure that provide open standards which put into place
best practices in order to consume those resources.  In that
resolution, it introduces some concepts which are quite prevalent in
many other infrastructure cloud components (which generally are not
self-hosted) that are not yet very strong inside OpenStack.

For example, using domains for specific applications, improving policy
support for a more predictable set of ACLs which allows developers to
be more productive and empower them more to automate their
infrastructure

The good thing is quite a few good things have come out of this:

- The OpenStack provider for Kubernetes is getting stronger than even
(and will soon hopefully get gating to improve stability)
- Policy in code has made great process over the past few cycles
(great stepping stone towards more predictable ACLs)

However, I think that we still have quite a bits way to make things
more standardized on this side of things, some projects use
"ResellerAdmin", others picked "_Member_", some went with "member",
others have ACLs that use "creator", some projects have
project-specific role names.  I think that the next step would be to
unify all of those, so that at least the (base) roles are predictable
across clouds.

> --
> Emilien Macchi
>
> __
> 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



-- 
Mohammed Naser — vexxhost
-
D. 514-316-8872
D. 800-910-1726 ext. 200
E. mna...@vexxhost.com
W. http://vexxhost.com

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Clay Gerrard]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Clay Gerrard 
wrote:

> I ment to include reference back to (what I believe) was the original work:
>

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453262/
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Clay Gerrard]

I ment to include reference back to (what I believe) was the original work:


On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Clay Gerrard 
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Emilien Macchi 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> The vision exercise was, in my opinion, one of the more exciting
>> things we have done in 2017.
>>
>
> Yeah for sure, that was a big goings-on.
>
> It's not an easy thing to do because of our diverses opinions, but
>> together we managed to write something down, propose it to the
>> community in the open and make it better afterward (of course this
>> will never finish).
>>
>> Outcome related, I loved the fact we're thinking outside of the
>> OpenStack community and see how we can make OpenStack projects usable
>> in environments without all the ecosystem. I also like to see our
>> strong efforts to increase diversity in all sorts and our work to
>> improve community health.
>>
>> Beside the outcome, I loved to see all TC members able to work
>> together on this Vision in the open, I hope we can do more of that in
>> the future, even outside of the TC (in teams). (ex: doc team had a PTG
>> session about visioning as well).
>> I hope I answered the question,
>
>
> Yup.  Unifying and disseminating an acceptable future state of an
> organization is definitely _one_ important job of "leadership".
>
>
>> please let me know if that's not the
>> case if you want more details.
>> --
>> Emilien Macchi
>>
>>
> Thanks!
>
>
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Clay Gerrard]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Emilien Macchi  wrote:

>
> The vision exercise was, in my opinion, one of the more exciting
> things we have done in 2017.
>

Yeah for sure, that was a big goings-on.

It's not an easy thing to do because of our diverses opinions, but
> together we managed to write something down, propose it to the
> community in the open and make it better afterward (of course this
> will never finish).
>
> Outcome related, I loved the fact we're thinking outside of the
> OpenStack community and see how we can make OpenStack projects usable
> in environments without all the ecosystem. I also like to see our
> strong efforts to increase diversity in all sorts and our work to
> improve community health.
>
> Beside the outcome, I loved to see all TC members able to work
> together on this Vision in the open, I hope we can do more of that in
> the future, even outside of the TC (in teams). (ex: doc team had a PTG
> session about visioning as well).
> I hope I answered the question,


Yup.  Unifying and disseminating an acceptable future state of an
organization is definitely _one_ important job of "leadership".


> please let me know if that's not the
> case if you want more details.
> --
> Emilien Macchi
>
>
Thanks!
__
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Emilien Macchi]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Clay Gerrard  wrote:
[...]

> To candidates:
>
> Would you please self select a change (or changes) from
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/ in the past ~12 mo or so where they
> thought the outcome or the discussion/process was particular good and
> explain why you think so?
>
> It'd be super helpful to me, thanks!

The vision exercise was, in my opinion, one of the more exciting
things we have done in 2017.
It's not an easy thing to do because of our diverses opinions, but
together we managed to write something down, propose it to the
community in the open and make it better afterward (of course this
will never finish).

Outcome related, I loved the fact we're thinking outside of the
OpenStack community and see how we can make OpenStack projects usable
in environments without all the ecosystem. I also like to see our
strong efforts to increase diversity in all sorts and our work to
improve community health.

Beside the outcome, I loved to see all TC members able to work
together on this Vision in the open, I hope we can do more of that in
the future, even outside of the TC (in teams). (ex: doc team had a PTG
session about visioning as well).
I hope I answered the question, please let me know if that's not the
case if you want more details.
-- 
Emilien Macchi

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

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][election] Question for the candidates

[Emilien Macchi]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Ed Leafe  wrote:
> In the past year or so, has there been anything that made you think “I wish 
> the TC would do something about that!” ? If so, what was it, and what would 
> you have wanted the TC to do about it?

I've been part of the TC during the past year (first time) but I still
have an answer to that question.
There is one thing I wish the TC would do more is to encourage
projects to grow and empower trust in certain projects.
Beside technical things, we want an healthy community and grow
developer's knowledge so OpenStack can be a better place to
contribute. I think some projects are doing well but some of them
might need some mentoring on that front (maybe from some TC members).
For example, I'm thinking about the way some projects handle core
reviewers elections and their metrics used to do so. I think the TC
might ensure that healthy metrics and discussion happen, so projects
can scale.

I'm happy to answer questions on that topic.

Thanks Ed for this first question :-)
-- 
Emilien Macchi

__
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