On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 12:46 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015, at 12:29 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: > > The TC is in the middle of implementing a fairly significant change in > > project governance. You can find an overview from Thierry on the > > OpenStack blog [1]. > > > > Part of the change is to recognize more projects as being part of the > > OpenStack community. Another critical part was replacing the integrated > > release with a set of tags. A project would be given a tag if it meets > > some defined set of criteria. > > > > I feel that we're at a very vulnerable part of this transition. We've > > abolished the incubation process and integrated release. We've > > established a fairly low bar for new projects [2]. However, we have not > > yet approved *any* tags other than the one that reflects which projects > > are included in the final integrated release (Kilo) [3]. Despite the > > previously discussed challenges with the integrated release, > > it did at least mean that a project has met a very useful set of > > criteria [4]. > > > > We now have several new project proposals. However, I propose not > > approving any new projects until we have a tagging system that is at > > least far enough along to represent the set of criteria that we used to > > apply to all OpenStack projects (with exception for ones we want to > > consciously drop). Otherwise, I think it's a significant setback to our > > project governance as we have yet to provide any useful way to navigate > > the growing set of projects. > > > > The resulting set of tags doesn't have to be focused on replicating our > > previous set of criteria. The focus must be on what information is > > needed by various groups of consumers and tags are a mechanism to > > implement that. In any case, we're far from that point because today we > > have nothing. > > > > I can't think of any good reason to rush into approving projects in the > > short term. If we're not able to work out this rich tagging system in a > > reasonable amount of time, then maybe the whole approach is broken and > > we need to rethink the whole approach. > > I think we made it pretty clear that we would be taking approvals > slowly, and that we might not approve any new projects before the > summit, precisely for the reasons you state here. I have found the > submitted proposals
Oops I have found the existing applications useful for thinking about what tags we need, and what other criteria we might be missing (Joe's proposal to add a team employer diversity requirement is one example). Doug > > > > > Thanks, > > > > [1] > > http://www.openstack.org/blog/2015/02/tc-update-project-reform-progress/ > > [2] > > http://governance.openstack.org/reference/new-projects-requirements.html > > [3] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/tags/index.html > > [4] > > http://governance.openstack.org/reference/incubation-integration-requirements.html > > > > -- > > Russell Bryant > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > 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