Jay Pipes wrote: > 4) I see a lot of agenda items around projects like Gluon, Craton, Watcher, > and Blazar. I don't see any concrete ideas about talking with the developers > of the key infrastructure services that OpenStack is built around. How does > the LCOO plan on reaching out to the developers of the long-standing > OpenStack projects like Nova, Neutron, Cinder, and Keystone to drive their > shared agenda?
To expand on this point: How effective are these teams at actually communicating with the developers of OpenStack components? My concern is that all these working teams collect a lot of information, then it is left in these silos and never makes their way back to projects like Neutron, Nova, etc... I suppose I am also philosophically opposed to having all these special snowflake working groups. If you want to get things done in OpenStack the best thing to do is roll up your sleeves and start participating directly in the project where you need work done. I know for a fact that in the Neutron community, we had RFE bugs and other processes so that operators could submit requirements, and they weren't expected to do all the work by themselves. I didn't emerge from the void, fully formed, as a Neutron developer. I was part of a team that had pain points in Neutron that we needed to alleviate, so we jumped into the Neutron community, participated in the weekly IRC meetings, filed bugs, started contributing patches, etc... So why have these groups? -- Sean M. Collins __________________________________________________________________________ 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