60 lines
2.9 KiB
Plaintext
60 lines
2.9 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
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.
|