On 2018-06-11 15:09:55 -0500 (-0500), Jay S Bryant wrote: [...] > Fair enough. It would help if we had buy-in from all of the > projects but you are right that nothing prevents us from achieving > consensus from those are are willing to participate. [...]
Yes, we started out thinking that was going to be the way forward and eventually learned from that mistake. It's debilitatingly depressing to work on a project whose intended users keep saying they want it to be identical to the also-questionably-designed thing they're currently using because any change in process is some amount of effort they can avoid by deferring. Refusing to let anyone use SB year after year because it's wasn't quite ready enough for everybody (even if it was plenty useful for somebody) resulted in the people who had been assigned to work on it rage-quit from the endless negativity being heaped on them. It was only when it found other potential users outside the OpenStack ecosystem entirely that new life was breathed into the project, because it was getting used by somebody who couldn't be told they weren't allowed. We resolved soon after that to discard our prior fear of different projects relying on different tools, realizing that no progress would ever be made if we required everyone to agree to use it first. -- Jeremy Stanley
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
