On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 7:23 AM, James E. Blair <cor...@inaugust.com> wrote:
> Joshua Hesketh <joshua.hesk...@gmail.com> writes: > > > So the "winterscale infrastructure council"'s purview is quite limited in > > scope to just govern the services provided? > > > > If so, would you foresee a need to maintain some kind of "Infrastructure > > council" as it exists at the moment to be the technical design body? > > For the foreseeable future, I think the "winterscale infrastructure > team" can probably handle that. If it starts to sprawl again, we can > make a new body. > > > Specifically, wouldn't we still want somewhere for the "winterscale > > infrastructure team" to be represented and would that expand to any > > infrastructure-related core teams? > > Can you elaborate on this? I'm not following. > I think your first response answers this a little bit. That is, the "winterscale infrastructure team" serves the purpose of technical design (that is currently done by the "Infrastructure Council", so we've got some change in terminology that will be initially confusing). Currently though the "Infrastructure Council" includes "All members of any infrastructure project core team" which would include people from say git-review core. My question was how do we still include infrastructure-related core members (such as git-review-core) in the new world order? Hope that makes more sense. Cheers, Josh > > -Jim > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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
