openstack-doc-core team mailing list archive

[Lana Brindley <openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 28/05/15 22:55, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> On 05/28/2015 02:47 PM, Anne Gentle wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 3:24 AM, Andreas Jaeger <aj@xxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:aj@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 05/28/2015 02:28 AM, Lana Brindley wrote:
>>
>>         -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>         Hash: SHA1
>>
>>         Hi everyone,
>>
>>         On the back of the 'Team Structure' Design Summit session, I've
>>         decided
>>         to implement the new core reviewer process as discussed. I've
>>         written it
>>         up on the HowTo:
>>        
>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/HowTo#Achieving_core_reviewer_status
>>
>>
>>
>>     Please keep in mind that the stackalytics URL you give includes
>>     security-doc and training-guides which have separate core teams, so
>>     double check the entries.
>>
>>     I suggest to use reviewstats instead since it uses only the doc-core
>>     repositories:
>>
>>     http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/docs-reviewers-30.txt
>>     http://russellbryant.net/openstack-stats/docs-reviewers-90.txt
>>
>>     See also:
>>    
>> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack-infra/reviewstats/tree/projects/docs.json

Ah, thanks, I'll update that.

>>
>>
>>         I'll initiate the first round of statistics-based approvals on
>>         Monday,
>>         so now is the time to yell if you don't like this plan, or think
>>         I have
>>         something backwards. Of course, if we do this once or twice and
>>         decide
>>         it sucks, then we can always change it in the future, too.
>>
>>
>>     Let's see how it works out ;) I'll yell when I see comments.
>>
>>     Btw. I think our last additions were a bit premature, I don't see
>>     Alexander at all in the last 30 days ;(

Yeah, you're not the only one to mention that. Hopefully doing this more
frequently will help avoid that problem (or at least rectify in a
shorter timeframe). I want to make sure that while we're not increasing
the total number of cores, we're increasing the number of active and
valuable cores.

I'll also reach out to Alexander (and any others) personally.

>>
>>
>> Ah, good point.
>>
>> Lana, your write up is very oriented toward "achievement" and I think
>> that you'll need to also add how we want to rotate people off of core.

OK, I see your point. I'll add something to that effect.

>>
>> Also, on timing. Is every month a bit too much churn especially once you
>> start removing people from core?
> 
> If we look at 30 and 90 stats, it shoiuld fine. People sure take
> vacations and shouldn't be removed for one month of inactivity.

Yes, I was hoping to pick a time shorter than the stats we use, for that
reason.

> 
>> And then lastly, the debate always occurs about how "core" is not a
>> badge but a review responsibility. How can we make it less of an
>> "achievement" and more of a "responsibility" in the write-up?
> 
> 
> I agree. core is really an extra responsibility!

I'm not sure we should be playing it down too much. OpenStack is very
good at discouraging people from stepping up (I got many more
'commiserations' than 'congratulations' on becoming PTL, for example).
While I see the point (being core and PTL, etc is sometimes hard work),
it seems like a really negative culture that I'm not entirely
comfortable with. I'm happy to add that core team are expected to carry
a heavier workload and be more visible and responsible, etc, but I also
don't want to take away from the fact that working hard enough to
achieve core is definitely a recognition of that work, and not just a
punishment for failing not to be seen.

> 
>> Thanks for doing this work -- definitely needed.
> 
> +1 ;)

You're welcome :)

L

- -- 
Lana Brindley
Technical Writer
Rackspace Cloud Builders Australia
http://lanabrindley.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVZ5G4AAoJELppzVb4+KUyixMH/2eqxbPK4EjTPign2XE9ZeTP
5aLms+yGTK2R30lh06Le3A49J1O/67uDIYMt9vbllgwgBlw1/9Jj12yhzu3QdDIJ
3pF5vFHPX5bA9tsBeP9YrMcKGn/UrVid9vMQ8cJaYKaYH5Zj4FLiCqVN8RnoP6bR
eVWBEBY2ENGMm1qxlIOxxgVp4KH7cVIZ4ta7Xt/OuCt5DcHffcrhzpMmun1SY8XV
uJeq/jAlyMwm0+xjsLqELFfjnzbINZ8aLHHpYy7mbk+0HXrprTLIXT5ftZuhSWTY
f8BCqXPmv6u1uPffbZjtpufaG06MXmg0onEORWSgMT82i3wPlzQkjZxroZamow0=
=i3cf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----