On 10/07/2015 06:22 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > On 10/07/2015 09:24 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >> On 10/07/2015 08:57 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: >>> Sean Dague wrote: >>>> We're starting to make plans for the next cycle. Long term plans are >>>> getting made for details that would happen in one or two cycles. >>>> >>>> As we already have the locations for the N and O summits I think we >>>> should do the naming polls now and have names we can use for this >>>> planning instead of letters. It's pretty minor but it doesn't seem like >>>> there is any real reason to wait and have everyone come up with working >>>> names that turn out to be confusing later. >>> >>> That sounds fair. However the release naming process currently >>> states[1]: >>> >>> """ >>> The process to chose the name for a release begins once the location of >>> the design summit of the release to be named is announced and no sooner >>> than the opening of development of the previous release. >>> """ >>> >>> ...which if I read it correctly means we could pick N now, but not O. We >>> might want to change that (again) first. >>> >>> [1] http://governance.openstack.org/reference/release-naming.html >> >> Right, it seems like we should change it so that we can do naming as >> soon as the location is announced. >> >> For projects like Nova that are trying to plan things more than one >> cycle out, having those names to hang those features on is massively >> useful (as danpb also stated). Delaying for bureaucratic reasons just >> seems silly. :) > > So, for what it's worth, I remember discussing this when we discussed > the current process, and the change you are proposing was one of the > options put forward when we talked about it. > > The reason for not doing all of them as soon as we know them was to keep > a sense of ownership by the people who are actually working on the > thing. Barcelona is a long way away and we'll all likely have rage quit > by then, leaving the electorate for the name largely disjoint from the > people working on the release. > > Now, I hear you - and I'm not arguing that position. (In fact, I believe > my original thought was in line with what you said here) BUT - I mostly > want to point out that we have had this discussion, the discussion was > not too long ago, it covered this point, and I sort of feel like if we > have another discussion on naming process people might kill us with > pitchforks.
You are assuming that not having this conversation might shield you from the pitchforks. Anita. > > Monty > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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