On 16-09-21 05:08 PM, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
Jakub,
Please see below.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Jakub Pavlik <jakub.pav...@tcpcloud.eu> wrote:
Hello all,
it took us 2 years of hard working to get these official. OpenStack-Salt is
now used by around 40 production deployments and it is focused very on
operation and popularity is growing. You are removing the project week after
one of top contributor announced that they will use that as part of
solution. We made a mistakes, however I do not think that is reason to
remove us. I do no think that quality of the project is measured like this.
Our PTL got ill and did not do properly his job for last 3 weeks, but this
can happen anybody.
It is up to you. If you think that we are useless for community, then
remove us and we will have to continue outside of this community. However
growing successful use cases will not be under official openstack community,
which makes my feeling bad.
Data points so far are:
1. No response during Barcelona planning for rooms
2. Lack of candidates for PTL election
3. No activity in the releases/ repository hence no entries in
https://releases.openstack.org/
4. Meetings are not so regular?
http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_salt/2016/ (supposed
to be weekly)
5. Is the specs repo really active?
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/openstack-salt-specs/ is the
work being done elsewhere?
6. Is there an effort to add stuff to the CI jobs running on openstack
infrastructure? (can't seem to find much
http://codesearch.openstack.org/?q=salt&i=nope&files=zuul%2Flayout.yaml&repos=project-config)
I'll stop here and switch to #openstack-salt channel to help work you
all through if there is a consensus/willingness from the
openstack-salt team that there's significant work to be done. If you
think you are better off not on the governance, that would be your
call as well.
Thanks,
Dims
Thanks,
Jakub
On 21.9.2016 21:03, Doug Hellmann wrote:
Excerpts from Filip Pytloun's message of 2016-09-21 20:36:42 +0200:
On 2016/09/21 13:23, Doug Hellmann wrote:
The idea of splitting the contributor list comes up pretty regularly
and we rehash the same suggestions each time. Given that what we
have now worked fine for 57 of the 59 offical teams (the Astara
team knew in advance it would not have a PTL running, and Piet had
some sort of technical issue submitting his candidacy for the UX
team), I'm not yet convinced that we need to make large-scale changes
to our community communication standard practices in support of the
2 remaining teams.
That's not to say that the system we have now is perfect, but we
can't realistically support multiple systems at the same time. We
need everyone to use the same system, otherwise we have (even more)
fragmented communication. So, we either need everyone to agree to
some new system and then have people step forward to implement it,
or we need to all agree to do our best to use the system we have
in place now.
I think it may work as is (with proper mail filters), but as someone
already
mentioned in this thread it would be better to have someone more
experienced
in Openstack community projects as a core team member or PTL to catch all
these things otherwise it may happen that inexperienced PTL/team just
miss
something like now.
If the team needs help, please ask for it. We should be able to find
someone to do a little mentoring and provide some guidance.
Still I don't think it's such a big issue to just fire project from Big
Tent -
who will benefit from that? Again someone already mentioned what will it
mean
for such team (loss of potencial developers, etc.).
Moreover for teams who are actively working on project as it seems that
both
OpenStackSalt and Security teams do.
Signing up to be a part of the big tent is not free. Membership comes
with expectations and obligations. Failing to meet those may be an
indication that the team isn't ready, or that membership is not a good
fit.
And I thought that real work on a project is our primary goal.. this
situation
is like loosing job when I left dirty coffee cup at my workspace.
I hope you consider team leadership and community participation to
be more important than your analogy implies.
Doug
Did your release liaison follow the instructions to make that happen?
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/releases/tree/README.rst
That seems to be the reason. There was new release planned with support
for
containerized deployment which would follow that guide (as first releases
were
done during/shortly after openstack-salt move to Big Tent).
As mentioned above - more experienced PTL would be helpful here and we
are
currently talking with people who could fit that position.
I see no emails tagged with [salt] on the mailing list since March of
this year, aside from this thread. Are you using a different communication
channel for team coordination? You mention IRC, but how are new contributors
expected to find you?
Yes, we are using openstack-salt channel and openstack meetings over
IRC. This channel is mentioned eg. in readme here [1] and community
meetings page [2] which are on weekly basis (logs [3]).
We also had a couple of people comming to team IRC talking to us about
project
so I believe they can find the way to contact us even without our heavy
activity at openstack-dev (which should be better as I admitted).
That works great for folks in your timezones. It's less useful for
anyone who isn't around at the same time as you, which is one reason
our community emphasizes using email communications. Email gives
you asynchronous discussions for timezone coverage, allows folks
who are traveling or off work for a period to catch up on and
participate in discussions later, etc.
[1] https://github.com/openstack/openstack-salt
[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/openstack-salt
[3] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/openstack_salt/2016/
Of course I don't want to excuse our fault. In case it's not too
late,
we will try to be more active in mailing lists like openstack-dev and
not miss such important events next time.
[1] http://stackalytics.com/?module=openstacksalt-group
-Filip
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Thierry Carrez
<thie...@openstack.org>
wrote:
Hi everyone,
As announced previously[1][2], there were no PTL candidates within
the
election deadline for a number of official OpenStack project teams:
Astara, UX, OpenStackSalt and Security.
In the Astara case, the current team working on it would like to
abandon
the project (and let it be available for any new team who wishes to
take
it away). A change should be proposed really soon now to go in that
direction.
In the UX case, the current PTL (Piet Kruithof) very quickly
reacted,
explained his error and asked to be considered for the position for
Ocata. The TC will officialize his nomination at the next meeting,
together with the newly elected PTLs.
That leaves us with OpenStackSalt and Security, where nobody reacted
to
the announcement that we are missing PTL candidates. That points to
a
real disconnect between those teams and the rest of the community.
Even
if you didn't have the election schedule in mind, it was pretty hard
to
miss all the PTL nominations in the email last week.
The majority of TC members present at the meeting yesterday
suggested
that those project teams should be removed from the Big Tent, with
their
design summit space allocation slightly reduced to match that (and
make
room for other not-yet-official teams).
In the case of OpenStackSalt, it's a relatively new addition, and if
they get their act together they could probably be re-proposed in
the
future. In the case of Security, it points to a more significant
disconnect (since it's not the first time the PTL misses the
nomination
call). We definitely still need to care about Security (and we also
need
a home for the Vulnerability Management team), but I think the
"Security
team" acts more like a workgroup than as an official project team,
as
evidenced by the fact that nobody in that team reacted to the lack
of
PTL nomination, or the announcement that the team missed the bus.
The suggested way forward there would be to remove the "Security
project
team", have the Vulnerability Management Team file to be its own
official project team (in the same vein as the stable maintenance
team),
and have Security be just a workgroup rather than a project team.
Thoughts, comments ?
[1]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-
September/103904.html
[2]
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-
September/103939.html
--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
__________________________________________________________________________
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
__________________________________________________________________________
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
--
Jakub Pavlik
CTO
[tcp ◕ cloud]
+420 602 177 027
jakub.pav...@tcpcloud.eu
tcp cloud a.s.
Thamova 16
186 00 Praha 8 - Karlin
Czech republic
http://tcpcloud.eu
http://opentcpcloud.org
__________________________________________________________________________
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
Being removed from governance does not preclude one from being added in
the future.
As stated many ways already, being in the governance repo means you
agree to be governed. If you are unaware of how we govern it is hard to
uphold your end of the agreement.
Should the decision be to remove this project (or any other), removal is
simply an acknowledgement of current status. This project is not
governed. Should you wish to be governed, and uphold your end of that
agreement, you can apply to be re-added to governance in the future.
Thanks,
Anita.
__________________________________________________________________________
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
