From a86834344dd7802a4d8a02236bc4b9a5c73920d9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Chris Dent Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 16:08:16 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Adding Chris Dent candidacy for TC Change-Id: I204fbf3e3815746caf7753c33bd93883c55b36c4 --- candidates/ocata/TC/cdent.txt | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+) create mode 100644 candidates/ocata/TC/cdent.txt diff --git a/candidates/ocata/TC/cdent.txt b/candidates/ocata/TC/cdent.txt new file mode 100644 index 00000000..e149c594 --- /dev/null +++ b/candidates/ocata/TC/cdent.txt @@ -0,0 +1,59 @@ + +Despite its name, the Technical Committee has become the part of the +OpenStack contributor community that enshrines, defines, and -- in some +rare cases -- enforces what it means to be "OpenStack". Meanwhile, +the community has seen a great deal of growth and change. + +Some of these changes have led to progress and clarity, others have left +people confused about how they can best make a contribution and what +constraints their contributions must meet (for example, do we all know +what it means to be an "official" project?). + +Much of the confusion, I think, can be traced to two things: + +* Information is not always clear nor clearly available, despite + valiant efforts to maintain a transparent environment for the + discussion of policy and process. There is more that can be done + to improve engagement and communication. Maybe the TC needs + release notes? + +* Agreements are made without the full meaning and implications of those + agreements being collectively shared. Most involved think they agree, + but there is limited shared understanding, so there is limited + effective collaboration. We see this, for example, in the ongoing + discussions on "What is OpenStack?". Agreement is claimed without + actually existing. + +We can fix this, but we need a TC that has a diversity of ideas and +experiences. Other candidates will have dramatically different opinions +from me. This is good because we must rigorously and vigorously question +the status quo and our assumptions. Not to tear things down, but to +ensure our ideas are based on present day truths and clear visions of +the future. And we must do this, always, where it can be seen and +joined and later discovered; gerrit and IRC are not enough. + +To have legitimate representation on the Technical Committee we must +have voices that bring new ideas, are well informed about history, that +protect the needs of existing users and developers, encourage new users +and developers, that want to know how, that want to know why. No single +person can speak with all these voices. + +Several people have encouraged me to run for the TC, wanting my +willingness to ask questions, to challenge the status quo and to drive +discourse. What I want is to use my voice to bring about frequent and +positive reevaluation. + +We have a lot of challenges ahead. We want to remain a pleasant, +progressive and relevant place to participate. That will require +discovering ways to build bridges with other communities and within our +own. We need to make greater use of technologies which were not invented +here and be more willing to think about the future users, developers and +use cases we don't yet have (as there will always be more of those). We +need to keep looking and pushing forward. + +To that end I'm nominating myself to be a member of the Technical +Committee. + +If you have specific questions about my goals, my background or anything +else, please feel free to ask. I'm on IRC as cdent or send some email. +Thank you for your consideration.