openstack-poc team mailing list archive
-
openstack-poc team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #00262
Re: Meeting tomorrow
-
To:
openstack-poc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-
From:
Thierry Carrez <thierry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
-
Date:
Tue, 13 Sep 2011 11:53:31 +0200
-
In-reply-to:
<CAAE6tVZAaZkzJiod3vHziytJjTDJb=V7RwNpmbVhk3Cn85rqvg@mail.gmail.com>
-
Organization:
OpenStack
-
User-agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Thunderbird/3.1.13
Jay Pipes wrote:
> As for the API coordinator, I thought we had already voted yes on that?
My position on the "API coordinator" is that there is no need for
amending our governance and creating an official position for that.
I'm all in favor of a technical meritocracy where someone that cares
about a subject (or is paid to care about a subject) and does a great
job of owning the subject ends up being respected by his peers and be
responsible for it.
So if Jorge wants to work on API guidelines and convergence efforts, I
don't think that needs to be voted by the PPB beforehand. He can just
start working on that and do a great job at it. And anyone interested
can join him.
The PPB /could/ be called to resolve conflicts (between PTLs, or between
people working on API guideliens and PTLs) if there are any, under its
attribution of ensuring "commonality" and "integration" between projects
-- but I surely hope concerns can be directly addressed between the
interested parties.
And by the way (and before anyone inserts snarky comments), that also
applies to the release management job. Anyone interested is free to help
me there. And everyone can ultimately appeal to the PPB if there is
disagreement. This is a duty, not a set of rights.
--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Release Manager, OpenStack
References