Thierry,
I am not a big fan of the separate gerrit teams we have instituted inside the
Kolla project. I always believed we should have one core reviewer team
responsible for all deliverables to avoid not just the appearance but the
reality that each team would fragment the overall community of people working
on Kolla containers and deployment tools. This is yet another reason I didn’t
want to split the repositories into separate deliverables in the first place –
since it further fragments the community working on Kolla deliverables.
When we made our original mission statement, I originally wanted it scoped
around just Ansible and Docker. Fortunately, the core review team at the time
made it much more general and broad before we joined the big tent. Our mission
statement permits multiple different orchestration tools.
Kolla is not “themed”, at least to me. Instead it is one community with
slightly different interests (some people work on Ansible, some on Kubernetes,
some on containers, some on all 3, etc). If we break that into separate
projects with separate PTLs, those projects may end up competing with each
other (which isn’t happening now inside Kolla). I think competition is a good
thing. In this case, I am of the opinion it is high time we end the
competition on deployment tools related to containers and get everyone working
together rather than apart. That is, unless those folks want to “work apart”
which of course is their prerogative. I wouldn’t suggest merging teams today
that are separate that don’t have a desire to merge. That said, Kolla is very
warm and open to new contributors so hopefully no more new duplicate effort
solutions are started.
Siloing the deliverables into separate teams I believe would result in the
competition I just mentioned, and further discord between the deployment tool
projects in the big tent. We need consolidation around people working
together, not division. Division around Kolla weakens Kolla specifically and
doesn’t help out OpenStack all that much either.
The idea of branding or themes is not really relevant to me. Instead this is
all about the people producing and consuming Kolla. I’d like these folks to
work together as much as feasible. Breaking a sub-community apart (in this
case Kolla) into up to 4 different communities with 4 different PTLs sounds
wrong to me.
I hope my position is clear ☺ If not, feel free to ask any follow-up questions.
Regards
-steve
-----Original Message-----
From: Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org>
Organization: OpenStack
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 at 4:21 AM
To: "openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][kolla] Adding new deliverables
Michał Jastrzębski wrote:
> I created CIVS poll with options we discussed. Every core member should
> get link to poll voting, if that's not the case, please let me know.
Just a quick sidenote to explain how the "big-tent" model of governance
plays in here...
In the previous project structure model, we had "programs". If you
wanted to do networking stuff, you had to join the Networking program
(neutron). If you worked on object storage, you had to join the Object
Storage program (swift). The main issue with this model is that it
prevented alternate approaches from emerging (as a program PTL could
just refuse its emergence to continue to "own" that space). It also
created weird situations where there would be multiple distinct groups
of people in a program, but a single PTL to elect to represent them all.
That created unnecessary political issues within programs and tension
around PTL election.
Part of the big-tent project structure reform was to abolish programs
and organize our work around "teams", rather than "themes". Project
teams should be strongly aligned with a single team of people that work
together. That allowed some amount of competition to emerge (we still
try to avoid "gratuitous duplication of effort"), but most importantly
made sure groups of people could "own" their work without having to
defer to an outside core team or PTL. So if you have a distinct team, it
should be its own separate project team with its own PTL. There is no
program or namespace anymore. As a bonus side-effect, it made sure teams
would not indefinitely grow, and we all know that it's difficult to grow
core teams (and trust) beyond a certain point.
This is why we have multiple packaging project teams, each specialized
in a given package orchestration mechanism, rather than have a single
"Packaging" program with a single PTL and Ansible / Puppet / Chef
fighting in elections to get their man at the helm. This is why the
Storlets team, while deeply related to Swift and in very good
collaboration terms with them, was set up as a separate project team.
Different people, different team.
The fact that you're having hard discussions in Kolla about "adding new
deliverables" produced by distinct groups of people indicates that you
may be using Kolla as an old-style "program" rather than as a single
team. Why not set them up as separate project teams ? What am I missing
here ?
--
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
