My Peers,

I am self-nominating for serving you as your technical committee
representative.

I won't bore you with my professional accomplishments.  If you want to
see such information to judge if I'm qualified for serving you on the
technical committee team, that information is available in my
foundation profile linked at the bottom of this self-nomination or
on LinkedIn.

I'll get straight to the point instead.

I believe in OpenStack's mission.  I believe in the OpenStack way.
I believe in the Four Opens.  I believe in the OpenStack principles.
I believe in OpenStack itself.  I believe Open Source has changed the
world of computing in a fundamentally more effective way.  Most
importantly, I believe the diversity of opinions and teams in our
community are what make OpenStack special.  I'm a believer.

I think the TC has done a reasonable job of managing OpenStack's
tremendous technical growth.  If you want a history lesson from my
point of view on why OpenStack is the way it is today, please
reference my Newton technical committee self-nomination [1].

The Big Tent needs some fine tuning, and the technical committee is
working to make that occur.  Fine tuning to me doesn't mean we need to
overthrow years of progress because some folks perceive OpenStack as
having an identity crisis.  I also don't believe defending the status
quo represents fine tuning.  Fine tuning to me means making incremental
improvements to the state of the art.

This is how we develop software in OpenStack after a community around
the software has been bootstrapped.

Let's face reality for a moment.  OpenStack does have some problems.
They all stem from various choices made along the OpenStack journey.

There are five types of consumers of OpenStack's software:

application developers of the operator's clouds
consumers of the operator's clouds
infrastructure developers of the OpenStack software
operators operating clouds produced by the developers of the OpenStack software
OpenStack distributors

This problem so far has gone unacknowledged.  The problem to be
solved with OpenStack is ensuring the above five types of consumers
of OpenStack's software are served fairly, equally, with respect,
and most importantly effectively.  These are the individuals our
community represents.  This is an extremely difficult problem to solve.

Can it be solved alone by any individual?  NO.
Can in be solved by the technical committee?  NO.
Can it be solved by the technical committee and various other working
groups involved in making OpenStack tick?  NO.
Can it be solved by our community of developers, core reviewers,
project team leads, technical committee team, operators,
working groups, OpenStack distributors working in concert?  I am hopeful.

I am a tenacious problem solver.  If you make a choice to select me as
your technical committee representative, I will dedicate myself to
working with the technical committee to facilitate a solution to this
problem just as I have done in other leadership service roles inside
the OpenStack community.

While working to solve this problem, I will keep driving OpenStack
forward to the horizon with the help of your vote and the technical
committee.

Freenode: sdake
Review history: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/reviewer:2834,n,z
Commit history: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:2834,n,z
Stackalytics: http://stackalytics.com/?user_id=sdake&release=all
Foundation Profile: https://www.openstack.org/community/members/profile/360
Website: https://sdake.io
[1] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/election/tree/candidates/mitaka/TC/Steven_Dake.txt