Re: [openstack-dev] TC Report 17

[Emilien Macchi]

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Chris Dent  wrote:
>
> _This is published both as email and a blog post._
>
> # Intro
>
> As promised, here's my first attempt at providing a weekly overview
> of what's happening with the TC. The structure here is subject to
> change as I figure out what makes sense. Suggestions welcome.
>
> This one is short because it is based on today. Next week's will be
> based on the entire week.
>
> # Meeting
>
> ## Settling in the new folk
>
> Welcoming the new people and covering house rules[^1]. The fun part
> of this was by the 5th minute of the meeting we had already
> identified a lack of shared understanding on when to use a
> code-review vote and when to use a rollcall vote. There were a few
> different opinions. Before I get accused of casting shade before
> I've even started I think a) different opinions are _great_, b)
> highlighting those differences (so we can resolve them) even more so.
>
> One opinion that seemed to make sense was that code-review was for
> expressing a comment on the correctness of the content (as in, a -1
> is for many spelling mistakes, or poorly formatted yaml) and
> rollcall is the actual vote being made on the proposed change (yes,
> this is something I agree with; no, I disagree).
>
> [^1]: 
>
> ## User Survey findings
>
> Summary info about the findings of the user survey[^2]. Good question
> from the sidelines about the same big issues coming up in the
> findings of every survey. This then led to questions about what
> impact can the TC have in driving corporate contributors to focus on
> those issues (such as long term support and upgrade difficulty).
> There's a ever present need to make sure that stuff is effectively
> highlighted.
>
> Which then moved to the complicated problem of OpenStack moving both
> too fast and too slow at the same time, depending on who was
> looking. And the difficulty with lack of centralized control over
> the technical direction of OpenStack and (probably most importantly)
> the application of resources. It turned into a bit of black hole so
> the decision was to move the discussion to the mailing list, which I
> hope actually happens.
>
> heidijoy is going to provide some further analysis of "net promoter
> scores" to see what correlations exists. I was curious whether
> openstack devs like openstack more or less than other respondents.
>
> [^2]: 
>
> ## Maybe dropping the meeting
>
> Flavio has introduced a proposal to drop the regularly scheduled TC
> meeting[^3] in favor of more mailing list discussion and more ad-hoc
> meetings. This is something that could greatly change how the
> community interacts with the TC, so if you have a preference you can
> state it on the review.
>
> [^3]: 
>
> # Other Stuff in Progress
>
> ## Draft vision for the TC
>
> It's 2019 and the TC is looking back on itself[^4]. This is an exercise
> to think about where the TC wants to be in the future, and from
> there derive some goals to get there. From some of the feedback it
> is pretty clear that not everyone understands the nature of the
> exercise. This isn't a plan of action, more of a limbering exercise
> to figure out a plan of action.
>
> As you've probably seen there's been a big push to get feedback on
> this. It's worth providing.
>
> [^4]: 
>
> ## Lingering Proposals
>
> The following proposals are languishing, awaiting either feedback or
> further effort from the author. If these matter to you, you can add
> your voice.
>
> * [Add tag
> assert:never-breaks-compat](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446561/)
> * [deprecate postgresql in
> OpenStack](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/427880/)
> * [Describe what upstream support
> means](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/440601/)
>
> # Colophon
>
> This is intentionally a biased and incomplete view of events. I
> can't hope to report things objectively or completely so it is
> better to be open about it and hope that if there is disagreement
> with my interpretation of events or what I felt was worth mentioning
> people will respond saying so. Responses, engagement, feedback are
> the entire point for doing these. If, over time, my interpretation
> proves to be too out of bounds maybe someone else will start their
> own newsletter. And then after a while every member of the TC will
> be writing their own report.

Please keep doing that, I find it very useful.

Thanks,

> --
> Chris Dent  ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)   https://anticdent.org/
> freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent
> __
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> 

[openstack-dev] TC Report 17

[Chris Dent]

_This is published both as email and a blog post._

# Intro

As promised, here's my first attempt at providing a weekly overview
of what's happening with the TC. The structure here is subject to
change as I figure out what makes sense. Suggestions welcome.

This one is short because it is based on today. Next week's will be
based on the entire week.

# Meeting

## Settling in the new folk

Welcoming the new people and covering house rules[^1]. The fun part
of this was by the 5th minute of the meeting we had already
identified a lack of shared understanding on when to use a
code-review vote and when to use a rollcall vote. There were a few
different opinions. Before I get accused of casting shade before
I've even started I think a) different opinions are _great_, b)
highlighting those differences (so we can resolve them) even more so.

One opinion that seemed to make sense was that code-review was for
expressing a comment on the correctness of the content (as in, a -1
is for many spelling mistakes, or poorly formatted yaml) and
rollcall is the actual vote being made on the proposed change (yes,
this is something I agree with; no, I disagree).

[^1]: 

## User Survey findings

Summary info about the findings of the user survey[^2]. Good question
from the sidelines about the same big issues coming up in the
findings of every survey. This then led to questions about what
impact can the TC have in driving corporate contributors to focus on
those issues (such as long term support and upgrade difficulty).
There's a ever present need to make sure that stuff is effectively
highlighted.

Which then moved to the complicated problem of OpenStack moving both
too fast and too slow at the same time, depending on who was
looking. And the difficulty with lack of centralized control over
the technical direction of OpenStack and (probably most importantly)
the application of resources. It turned into a bit of black hole so
the decision was to move the discussion to the mailing list, which I
hope actually happens.

heidijoy is going to provide some further analysis of "net promoter
scores" to see what correlations exists. I was curious whether
openstack devs like openstack more or less than other respondents.

[^2]: 

## Maybe dropping the meeting

Flavio has introduced a proposal to drop the regularly scheduled TC
meeting[^3] in favor of more mailing list discussion and more ad-hoc
meetings. This is something that could greatly change how the
community interacts with the TC, so if you have a preference you can
state it on the review.

[^3]: 

# Other Stuff in Progress

## Draft vision for the TC

It's 2019 and the TC is looking back on itself[^4]. This is an exercise
to think about where the TC wants to be in the future, and from
there derive some goals to get there. From some of the feedback it
is pretty clear that not everyone understands the nature of the
exercise. This isn't a plan of action, more of a limbering exercise
to figure out a plan of action.

As you've probably seen there's been a big push to get feedback on
this. It's worth providing.

[^4]: 

## Lingering Proposals

The following proposals are languishing, awaiting either feedback or
further effort from the author. If these matter to you, you can add
your voice.

* [Add tag assert:never-breaks-compat](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/446561/)
* [deprecate postgresql in OpenStack](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/427880/)
* [Describe what upstream support 
means](https://review.openstack.org/#/c/440601/)

# Colophon

This is intentionally a biased and incomplete view of events. I
can't hope to report things objectively or completely so it is
better to be open about it and hope that if there is disagreement
with my interpretation of events or what I felt was worth mentioning
people will respond saying so. Responses, engagement, feedback are
the entire point for doing these. If, over time, my interpretation
proves to be too out of bounds maybe someone else will start their
own newsletter. And then after a while every member of the TC will
be writing their own report.

--
Chris Dent  ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)   https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent tw: @anticdent__
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