On Aug 23, 2014, at 6:35 PM, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Dolph Mathews's message of 2014-08-22 09:45:37 -0700: >> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Zane Bitter <zbit...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >>> On 22/08/14 11:19, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> >>>> Zane Bitter wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 22/08/14 08:33, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> We also >>>>>> still need someone to have the final say in case of deadlocked issues. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -1 we really don't. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I know we disagree on that :) >>>> >>> >>> No problem, you and I work in different programs so we can both get our >>> way ;) >>> >>> >>> People say we don't have that many deadlocks in OpenStack for which the >>>>>> PTL ultimate power is needed, so we could get rid of them. I'd argue >>>>>> that the main reason we don't have that many deadlocks in OpenStack is >>>>>> precisely *because* we have a system to break them if they arise. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> s/that many/any/ IME and I think that threatening to break a deadlock by >>>>> fiat is just as bad as actually doing it. And by 'bad' I mean >>>>> community-poisoningly, trust-destroyingly bad. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I guess I've been active in too many dysfunctional free and open source >>>> software projects -- I put a very high value on the ability to make a >>>> final decision. Not being able to make a decision is about as >>>> community-poisoning, and also results in inability to make any >>>> significant change or decision. >>>> >>> >>> I'm all for getting a final decision, but a 'final' decision that has been >>> imposed from outside rather than internalised by the participants is... >>> rarely final. >>> >> >> The expectation of a PTL isn't to stomp around and make "final" decisions, >> it's to step in when necessary and help both sides find the best solution. >> To moderate. >> > > Have we had many instances where a project's community divided into > two camps and dug in to the point where they actually needed active > moderation? And in those cases, was the PTL not already on one side of > said argument? I'd prefer specific examples here. > >>> >>> I have yet to see a deadlock in Heat that wasn't resolved by better >>> communication. >> >> >> Moderation == bettering communication. I'm under the impression that you >> and Thierry are agreeing here, just from opposite ends of the same spectrum. >> > > I agree as well. PTL is a servant of the community, as any good leader > is. If the PTL feels they have to drop the hammer, or if an impass is > reached where they are asked to, it is because they have failed to get > everyone communicating effectively, not because "that's their job.”
That’s certainly how I approach it. I consider myself responsible for helping the team coordinate and making sure we have everything covered. Sometimes that means asking for volunteers for a new task, and sometimes it means a gentle reminder of an previous commitment. That said, some responsibilities of the PTL role are outward-facing. Potentially anyone on the team could pick up those duties, just as any of the inward-facing duties, but having a single initial point of contact is especially useful when the priorities of two teams need to be aligned for a period of time to work on a joint task. Doug > > _______________________________________________ > 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