+hellyeah
On Mar 1, 2014 7:45 PM, Monty Taylor <mord...@inaugust.com> wrote: > > On 03/01/2014 03:30 PM, John Griffith wrote: > > Hey, > > > > I just wanted to send out a quick note on a topic that came up recently. > > Unfortunately the folks that I'd like to read this most; don't > > participate on the ML typically, but I'd at least like to raise some > > community awareness. > > > > We all know OpenStack is growing at a rapid pace and has a lot of > > promise, so much so that there's an enormous field of vendors and OS > > distributions that are focusing a lot of effort and marketing on the > > project. > > > > Something that came up recently in the Cinder project is that one of the > > backend device vendors wasn't happy with a feature that somebody was > > working on and contributed a patch for. Instead of providing a > > meaningful review and suggesting alternatives to the patch they set up > > meetings with other vendors leaving the active members of the community > > out and picked things apart in their own format out of the public view. > > Nobody from the core Cinder team was involved in these discussions or > > meetings (at least that I've been made aware of). > > > > I don't want to go into detail about who, what, where etc at this point. > > I instead, I want to point out that in my opinion this is no way to > > operate in an Open Source community. Collaboration is one thing, but > > ambushing other peoples work is entirely unacceptable in my opinion. > > OpenStack provides a plethora of ways to participate and voice your > > opinion, whether it be this mailing list, the IRC channels which are > > monitored daily and also host a published weekly meeting for most > > projects. Of course when in doubt you're welcome to send me an email at > > any time with questions or concerns that you have about a patch. In any > > case however the proper way to address concerns about a submitted patch > > is to provide a review for that patch. > > > > Everybody has a voice and the ability to participate, and the most > > effective way to do that is by thorough, timely and constructive code > > reviews.. > > > > I'd also like to point out that while a number of companies and vendors > > have fancy taglines like "The Leaders of OpenStack", they're not. > > OpenStack is a community effort, as of right now there is no company > > that leads or runs OpenStack. If you have issues or concerns on the > > development side you need to take those up with the development > > community, not vendor xyz. > > I have nothing to add except for a hearty HELL YES. > > Monty > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev