> having said so, I propose to set a date for our first (irc/goto) meeting; > wednesday 10 december 16:00 UTC? [Animesh] Can we push it out by 1 hour to 17:00 UTC, the current time falls out on my time for dropping kids to school. If it does not work for others I can join @14:00 UTC (6:00 AM PST)
> > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> > wrote: > > I am speaking as a committer who has limited insight into the > > 'correct' way to do this via Apache (so be gentle). :) > > > > I like the idea of a wiki page to help get everyone on the same page > > and to track the consensus as we move forward... > > > > I also agree that it is hard to come to a consensus on the list > > because it is really hard to have a constructive conversation on here > > in a timely manner where the different voices can be heard. > > > > I think it would be interesting to schedule sessions/meetings on the > > list so any interested party can join. These sessions/meetings would > > happen in a format like IRC where the transcript of the session can be > > later posted to the list as well as a summary of the transcript so it > > can be reviewed by any member who could not make the meeting. This > > way we keep all of the actual conversation in the list, but we also > > make it easier to actually have a 'conversation' at the same time. It > > is hard to beat real time when working through this sort of stuff. > > > > Does this make sense to others? Thoughts? > > > > Will > > > > > > *Will STEVENS* > > Lead Developer > > > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw > > @CloudOps_ > > > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi < > > animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com> wrote: > > > >> Wearing my PMC hat and with past experience on these discussions we > >> have not made much progress on mailing list despite agreeing on the > >> goals and have locked horns. One possibility after reading Chip's > >> email and concerns I see is that, we create a wiki outlining the > >> problem space, possible > >> solution(s) and their specific pros and cons and have people collaborate. > >> Once a general consensus is there and wiki is stable we can bring it > >> back to the mailing list for final approval. This is open as well as > >> requires participant a higher degree of commitment to collaborate and > >> will be more structured. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Animesh > >> > >> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Chip Childers > >> > <chipchild...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > > Steve, > >> > > > >> > > (Speaking with my PMC hat on, but not as someone that has the > >> > > time to help with this process) > >> > > > >> > > I love the idea of moving forward with resolving some of the > >> > > quality process / tooling / etc... challenges that we face as a > >> > > project and community. I also love the idea that companies > >> > > getting commercial value from this project are talking (as > >> > > companies) about how to best support the project through either > >> > > directing their employees to work on this problem, allowing those > >> > > interested the time to do so, and / or offering (as Citrix did) > >> > > required hardware/software resources to make improvements for the > >> > > common good. Importantly, I like that the companies involved are > >> > > mutually agreeing that this is for the common good. > >> > > > >> > > That said, I have a concern about the outline below, specifically > >> > > in how the definition of approach and eventual execution are handled. > >> > > The proposal of taking this off-list until there is a "proposal > >> > > to > >> ratify" > >> > > is what I'd like to see changed. I would fully expect that a > >> > > fleshed out proposal hitting the list would be met with more > >> > > discussion than you would like (and perhaps even met with frustration). > >> > > > >> > > What has worked well for us in the past, where there is a need to > >> > > have those interested in "doing work" to be able to focus on that > >> > > work, has been to start with a call for interested parties (as > >> > > you did). Then, using a combination of threads on this list and > >> > > "live" meetings, make progress on defining the requirements and > approach incrementally. > >> > > Execution of any work should similarly be open and shared on this list. > >> > > Throughout that process, allowing comments and openings for > >> > > participants are critical. > >> > > > >> > > One of the things we learned about using "live" meetings to speed > >> > > up the consensus process in the past is to make sure that while > >> > > they are fantastic at allowing the participants to understand > >> > > each other, it's critical to remember that (1) there are no > >> > > project decisions made outside of the mailing lists and (2) that > >> > > it's important to have minutes or notes from those live meetings > >> > > shared with the community as > >> a > >> > whole. > >> > > > >> > > Now a very real concern that some of us have is getting bogged > >> > > down in arguments based on opinion, especially the "drive by" > >> > > opinions. This issue (plus challenges with people violently > >> > > agreeing with each other, yet talking past each other), is what I > >> > > believe has held up meaningful progress. To deal with this, I > >> > > suggest we all remember that projects at the ASF are about > >> > > supporting those that "DO", while giving opportunity for > >> > > participation and comment from those that might not currently be > >> > > "DOING". But those that are doing the work, and collaborating to > >> > > reach a shared goal, shouldn't let a lack of 100% consensus on every > aspect hold back progress. > >> > > > >> > > As someone who will not be "doing" anything for this effort, but > >> > > has an interest in maintaining this community's health and seeing > >> > > it continue to succeed, I hope my suggestions and comments are helpful. > >> > > > >> > > -chip > >> > > > >> > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 07:12:27PM +0000, Steve Wilson wrote: > >> > >> Hi Everyone, > >> > >> > >> > >> It was great to get to see a number of you at the recent CCC in > >> Budapest. > >> > While I was there, I got to meet face to face with individuals > >> > working > >> for several > >> > companies that have a real stake in the commercial success of the > >> CloudStack > >> > project. > >> > >> > >> > >> After joining Citrix (and becoming involved in CloudStack) about > >> > >> a > >> year ago, > >> > I’ve come to believe that we need to do more to mature our quality > >> practices > >> > around this codebase. We all like to say #cloudstackworks (and > >> > it’s > >> true), but > >> > this is a massive codebase that’s used in the most demanding > >> situations. We > >> > have large telecommunications companies and enterprises who are > >> > betting > >> their > >> > businesses on this software. It has to be great! > >> > >> > >> > >> There has been quite a bit of discussion on the mailing list in > >> recent months > >> > about how we improve in this area. There is plenty of passion, but > >> > we > >> haven’t > >> > made enough concrete progress as a community. In my discussions > >> > with key contributors as CCC, there was general agreement that the > >> > DEV list isn’t > >> a good > >> > forum for hashing out these kinds of things. Email is too > >> > low-bandwidth > >> and too > >> > impersonal. > >> > >> > >> > >> At CCC, I discussed with several people the idea that we > >> > >> commission a > >> small > >> > sub team to go hash out a proposal for how we handle the following > >> > topics within the ACS community (which can then be brought back to > >> > the larger community for ratification): > >> > >> > >> > >> * Continuous integration and test automation > >> > >> * Gating of commits > >> > >> * Overall commit workflow > >> > >> > >> > >> We are looking for volunteers to commit to being part of this team. > >> This > >> > would imply a serious commitment. We don’t want hangers on or > observers. > >> > This will entail real work and late night meetings. We’re looking > >> > for > >> people who > >> > are serious contributors to the codebase. > >> > >> > >> > >> From Citrix, David Nalley and Animesh Chaturvedi have booth told > >> > >> me > >> they’re > >> > willing to commit to this project. They’ve both managed ACS > >> > releases > >> and have > >> > a really good view into the current process — and I know both are > >> passionate > >> > about improving our process. From my CCC discussions, I believe > >> > there > >> are > >> > individuals from Schuberg Philis, Shape Blue and Cloud Ops who are > >> willing to > >> > commit to this process. > >> > >> > >> > >> If you are willing to be part of this team to drive forward our > >> community, > >> > please reply here. > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> > >> > >> -Steve > >> > >> > >> > >> Steve Wilson > >> > >> VP & Product Unit Manager > >> > >> Cloud Software > >> > >> Citrix > >> > >> @virtualsteve > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Daan > >> > > > > -- > Daan
