> -----Original Message----- > From: Anita Kuno [mailto:ante...@anteaya.info] > Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2015 3:48 PM > To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc] naming N and O releases nowish > > 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. I, myself favor war hammers (very useful tool for separating plaster from lathe), but if we all rage quit, the new guard can always change the name as a middle finger salute to the old guard. Let's be daring! Let's name O, too!
--Rocky > 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 __________________________________________________________________________ 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