Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: OpenStack: Foundation

[Openstack] OpenStack Foundation

 

 

OpenStack foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


thierry at openstack

Jan 6, 2012, 3:06 AM

Post #1 of 3 (316 views)
Permalink
[Openstack] OpenStack Foundation

Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 15:16 -0500, mark at openstack.org wrote:
>> To kick things off I've created a Foundation page on the wiki and
>> published a "Foundation Mission" draft for comment
>
> Nicely done on the Foundation Mission. It covers a lot of ground
> concisely. Great start. Really.
>
> At first glance, one thing that seems missing is "OpenStack is a
> self-governing meritocracy". Compare with the GNOME Charter, "How the
> ASF works" and the Document Foundation Manifesto.
>
> There's lots of ways we could reflect this principle of meritocracy -
> e.g. to highlight that the foundation is not an entity separated from
> its members, but rather its members are the foundation. Members are
> empowered beyond the points you list; they are empowered to
> fundamentally shift the direction of the foundation itself. Influence in
> the foundation is based solely on what one is doing to drive the project
> forward. etc.

I agree with you. It sounds pretty critical to state that the foundation
is not independent from its contributing members. I would therefore
suggest to replace "The OpenStack Foundation is an independent body..."
by "The OpenStack Foundation is a self-governing meritocracy...".

The details on how to translate that into a governing structure belongs
to the yet-unknown structure document, but I think that key principle
belongs to the mission charter.

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)


markmc at redhat

Jan 6, 2012, 3:26 AM

Post #2 of 3 (302 views)
Permalink
[Openstack] OpenStack Foundation [In reply to]

Hi Soren,

On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 10:44 +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
> 2012/1/5 Jim Curry <jim.curry at rackspace.com>:

> > We are basing this initial proposal on a lot of input received from the
> > community and beyond ? developers, users, companies, other open source
> > projects and foundations, lawyers, specific country experts, etc.
>
> How has this worked? Have these people (who?) been asked a specific set
> of questions? Can we see them so that we can consider the same
> questions? Can we see the feedback itself?
>
> If you expect the foundation after it's been established to take it into
> consideration at all, it needs to be disclosed, otherwise the first
> revision of the bylaws/constitution might go against this feedback
> entirely, and then it's been a waste of time.

Wow, that is an awesome point.

If there is no open, transparent, detailed historical record of the
rationale for the foundation structure, then the foundation may choose
to make future structural changes without the benefit of the original
rationale.

Us hackers are well used to this with code and have all sorts of
techniques - e.g. code clarity, code comments, commit messages, detailed
bug reports, unit tests, mail/irc archives, etc. - to build up a body of
information that is invaluable to future hackers trying to understand
subtle decisions made by past hackers.

Cheers,
Mark.


trey.morris at rackspace

Jan 6, 2012, 3:16 PM

Post #3 of 3 (299 views)
Permalink
[Openstack] OpenStack Foundation [In reply to]

"I assume other developers are in the same boat as we often make better
tacticians than politicians."
+1

On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Todd Willey <todd at ansolabs.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 5:26 AM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
> > Hi Todd,
> >
> > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 18:29 -0500, Todd Willey wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > The previous thread here that I contributed to felt a little like
> >> > Thierry and I chatting alone in a giant cavern.
> >> >
> >> > That concerns me for two reasons - (1) the silence of all those
> >> > excellent RAX OpenStack developers suggests that those folks are
> either
> >> > afraid to publicly speak their mind on these matters, or they are
> >> > ambivalent about them and (2) there are obviously many other
> discussions
> >> > happening away from the transparency of this mailing list.
> >>
> >> Speaking for myself: I'm more interested in driving the code base
> >> forward than the foundation.
> >>
> >> The foundation bits are in the hands of trustworthy people that are
> >> very approachable. Knowing I can ask about it at any time, and that
> >> it is moving forward without having to constantly bird-dog it makes me
> >> happy and able to be productive in other ways.
> >
> > So, generally speaking, RAX hackers are regularly talking (in-person, on
> > private mail, irc, phone?) to the folks working on establishing the
> > foundation and are reassured by what they are hearing back?
>
> Sorry, the point I was trying to get across is that I don't
> necessarily need to be in discussions to feel confident. I don't
> think I've ever had a conversation about it, but I know they'll be
> responsive when pinged, and the people involved have been active in
> responding to this thread in the last couple of days.
>
> >
> > I'm reassured that you're reassured (genuinely), but I'd be more
> > reassured if such questions and assurances were happening on this list
> > where I too could be directly reassured by the assurances given ... if
> > you follow me :-)
>
> I follow you. I just wanted to point out that the reason I'm not
> asking on the list is that I'm not asking at all, because I haven't
> felt any concerns I needed to voice (yet). I think the early stages
> are likely to be very political and getting founding members to feel
> good about their positions in the new foundation. Once the
> discussions are less strategic and more tactical about how we actually
> implement very specific parts of our mission, I'll likely be more
> active. I assume other developers are in the same boat as we often
> make better tacticians than politicians.
>
> >
> >> I don't think there is going to be any publicly holding back from
> >> developers once there are more substantial bits that we have opinions
> >> on, and we'll register them on the list the same way as everyone else.
> >> Looking at the foundation archives, I'm not sure how you construed
> >> silence on behalf of RAX developers more than anyone else in the first
> >> place. It is very low volume so you have a poor sample to begin with,
> >> and a lot of what is there is in fact from Rackspace employees.
> >
> > Ok, cool. I'm really looking forward to hearing the thoughts of more
> > developers on this stuff.
> >
> > Thanks for the perspective Todd.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Mark.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to : openstack at lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/foundation/attachments/20120106/f8c62a57/attachment.html>

OpenStack foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.