we can't always hold the belief which we believe 5 years ago
After last week's report I got into an interesting conversation about it. The quote above is from that, by flwang1. I thought it was worth highlighting; OpenStack continues to evolve and grow and what was once true may be no longer.
TC elections are in progress. Near the end of last week there was a period where the candidates were presented with the opportunity to answer questions from the community. If you can vote and you haven't yet (or even if you have) there are some good questions and answers:
- What does and OpenStack user look like? Who are you building for?
- What's something you wish the TC had done something about? What should have been done?
- What's a governance review that was interesting/important/good?
- How can we make our community more inclusive?
- What will you do if you don't win?
Voting continues until Oct 20, 2017 23:45 UTC. If you are eligible
to vote you should have received an email from
"Kendall Nelson (CIVS
poll supervisor)" <email@example.com> with a subject of
Queens TC Election. Several people have reported finding theirs in
their spam folder, especially on gmail.
There's plenty of other stuff going on.
Take your manager to the TC day
On Wednesday, Josh Harlow showed up asking if a meeting between the TC and managers of engineers committed to OpenStack might be fruitful. There were mixed reactions, much around "what would we do with the information gained?" and "how do you make it be something other than a festival of complaint?"
If we can figure out good answers to those questions, I think it could be a useful engagement. There's an implicit assumption that there is straightforward proxying across the several boundaries between the happenings in the OpenStack community and what's going on within the confines of an employer. That assumption doesn't seem to be valid, and even if it is, having some conversations to re-align expectations (from all sides) could be useful.
The ongoing debate related to Glare's application to be an official project stalled today when the proposer chose to withdraw the application to give more time for some of the issues to resolve in a more obvious fashion. This is despite the application having crossed the requisite threshold for approval. There are some highlights from the discussion that are worth remembering for when this comes up again:
- Thursday's office hour revisited some of the issues.
- Review comments that
represent some of the positions (all on patchset 6):
- "We talk about encouraging innovation and a certain kind of competition in the project spaces, but it is clearly not a free-market, when it comes down to it we have more of a protectionist view in many areas."
- "I think the Glare team is refocusing on the right things. I would like to observe that change for a while to see how it goes before approving."
- The potential overlap with Glance and/or the image API or disruption thereof is a concern.
- "lack of focus: storing binary blobs and associated metadata is not a goal unto itself"
Foundation Board Activities
In today's office hour, there were two topics related to the TC's interaction with the OpenStack Foundation Board. There will be another joint Board/TC/UC meeting and while agenda items are solicited there's general agreement that the meeting in Denver feels like it was yesterday.
The other topic was about initial discussions around expanding the projects hosted by the Foundation to allow not-OpenStack, but-related-to-OpenStack projects to be in the domain of the Foundation. Examples include tools that enable NFV, edge computing, CI/CD, containers. Stuff that uses infrastructure. If this goes through, one of the potential wins is that existing OpenStack may get renewed focus and clarity of purpose.
If you can vote in the TC elections, please do.