Difference between revisions of "Technical Committee Tracker"
Julia Kreger (talk | contribs) (→Anti-nitpicking Cultural Change) |
|||
| (41 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
== Other Initiatives == | == Other Initiatives == | ||
| − | === | + | === Help most needed list evolution === |
| − | Drivers: | + | Drivers: ttx |
| − | Status: | + | Status: under discussion on the [http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-January/002252.html mailing-list] |
| − | + | Next step: Forum session | |
| − | + | Asking for help was not very successful, partially due to how intimidating it is for new contributors to join. Maybe proposing mentoring if you offer time is a more positive way to look at it. | |
| − | |||
| − | === | + | === Facilitating cross-project work / Formalizing pop-up teams === |
| − | Drivers: | + | Drivers: ttx |
| − | Status: | + | Status: under discussion on the [http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-January/002251.html mailing-list] |
| − | + | Next step: Forum session | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | Cross-project work is still difficult. Maybe formalizing the concept of pop-up teams a bit more, with clear scope and disband criteria (under the model of [https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/committee-steering/governance/wg-governance.md Kubernetes working groups]) would help. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
=== Technical Vision for OpenStack === | === Technical Vision for OpenStack === | ||
| − | Drivers: zaneb | + | Drivers: zaneb, cdent |
| − | Status: | + | Status: Under dicussion |
| − | + | The initial [https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/technical-vision.html vision] has been created. The agreed next step (to be done by cdent and TheJulia) is to publicize it and request that projects self-evaluate themselves against the vision. | |
References | References | ||
* [https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2018/summit-schedule/events/21739/official-projects-and-the-boundary-of-what-is-openstack Rocky Forum session] | * [https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2018/summit-schedule/events/21739/official-projects-and-the-boundary-of-what-is-openstack Rocky Forum session] | ||
* https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tech-vision-2018 | * https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/tech-vision-2018 | ||
| + | * [https://review.openstack.org/592205 Document review] | ||
| − | === | + | === Tags indicating the upgrade support in deployment tools === |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Drivers: ttx | Drivers: ttx | ||
| Line 168: | Line 54: | ||
* [https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-forum-fast-forward-upgrades Rocky Forum session notes] | * [https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-forum-fast-forward-upgrades Rocky Forum session notes] | ||
| − | === | + | === Do a better job at driving larger technical goals === |
| − | Drivers: ttx, | + | Drivers: ttx, TheJulia, cdent |
| − | Status: | + | Status: |
| + | Documenting the role of the TC revealed the need for the TC to do a better job at painting larger technical goals for the OpenStack community, beyond release goals. | ||
| − | + | Next step: Forum session | |
| − | |||
| − | === | + | === Clarifying Requirements for PTL Contact Details === |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Drivers: | Drivers: | ||
| − | + | Monty pointed out that we have a general community expectation that leaders are visible via IRC. That may not always be the case for some corners of our community, however. We need to decide whether we want to require IRC nicks for PTL candidates, whether we want to include other forms of contact for other chat platforms (optionally?), etc. and write a resolution so the election official have clear guidance. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | + | 2018-09-09 - need to figure out how to ask PTLs for a primary means of contact without dictating a specific means and without opening ourselves up to having to sign on to every new chat tool | |
Status: New | Status: New | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
References: | References: | ||
| − | |||
| − | + | * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/589696/ (abandoned) | |
| + | * https://review.openstack.org/#/c/590082/ (fills in missing nicks with "None supplied") | ||
| − | + | == Tracking OpenStack team health == | |
| − | + | See [[OpenStack_health_tracker]] for liaison assignment and status updates. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | == | + | == Recently completed things == |
| − | |||
Revision as of 09:32, 8 March 2019
The OpenStack Technical Committee is one of the governing bodies of the OpenStack project. You can find more information about it, such as the list of its current members or its governance charter, on the OpenStack TC governance website at https://governance.openstack.org/tc/ .
This page tracks the various governance changes being proposed and the various initiatives the Technical Committee is pursuing. We hold office hours at various times during the week on the #openstack-tc IRC channel. Conversation starters for the office hours are here.
Other tasks can be found in the storyboard project.
Status last updated: 2019/03/08
Contents
Project team changes
Documentation Changes
Other Initiatives
Help most needed list evolution
Drivers: ttx
Status: under discussion on the mailing-list
Next step: Forum session
Asking for help was not very successful, partially due to how intimidating it is for new contributors to join. Maybe proposing mentoring if you offer time is a more positive way to look at it.
Facilitating cross-project work / Formalizing pop-up teams
Drivers: ttx
Status: under discussion on the mailing-list
Next step: Forum session
Cross-project work is still difficult. Maybe formalizing the concept of pop-up teams a bit more, with clear scope and disband criteria (under the model of Kubernetes working groups) would help.
Technical Vision for OpenStack
Drivers: zaneb, cdent
Status: Under dicussion
The initial vision has been created. The agreed next step (to be done by cdent and TheJulia) is to publicize it and request that projects self-evaluate themselves against the vision.
References
Tags indicating the upgrade support in deployment tools
Drivers: ttx
Status: New
During the FFU session at the Rocky Forum, Dan Smith and David Medberry indicated interest in defining tags to describe what upgrade features deployment tools have.
References
Do a better job at driving larger technical goals
Drivers: ttx, TheJulia, cdent
Status: Documenting the role of the TC revealed the need for the TC to do a better job at painting larger technical goals for the OpenStack community, beyond release goals.
Next step: Forum session
Clarifying Requirements for PTL Contact Details
Drivers:
Monty pointed out that we have a general community expectation that leaders are visible via IRC. That may not always be the case for some corners of our community, however. We need to decide whether we want to require IRC nicks for PTL candidates, whether we want to include other forms of contact for other chat platforms (optionally?), etc. and write a resolution so the election official have clear guidance.
2018-09-09 - need to figure out how to ask PTLs for a primary means of contact without dictating a specific means and without opening ourselves up to having to sign on to every new chat tool
Status: New
References:
- https://review.openstack.org/#/c/589696/ (abandoned)
- https://review.openstack.org/#/c/590082/ (fills in missing nicks with "None supplied")
Tracking OpenStack team health
See OpenStack_health_tracker for liaison assignment and status updates.
