openstack-poc team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: User Committee appointee
On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 06:49 -0500, Jonathan Bryce wrote:
> On Sep 11, 2012, at 3:41 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 10:28 +0200, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> >> Jonathan Bryce wrote:
> >>> I would like to start by nominating Ryan Lane from Wikimedia. I think Ryan has done a great job of evangelizing OpenStack and also being a good voice for users among the technical community.
> >>> Anyone else is welcome to nominate alternatives.
> >> IMHO our ideal appointed member would be someone that is a user of
> >> OpenStack but also knows our development processes and has directly
> >> contributed to the project at some point. That way, while still being a
> >> "user", he can efficiently bring a perspective on what the developers
> >> can and cannot do.
> >> Ryan is definitely a very good option here. An alternative could be
> >> someone from Rackspace/HP Ops side that would also be involved a bit in
> >> development, but I don't know them well enough to pick.
> > I think Ryan is a good choice too.
> > However, I wonder whether we should aim to choose someone from the
> > Technical Committee itself - i.e. that whoever the TC appoints would
> > actually be a representative of the TC. Given that Tim Bell is a
> > Foundation Board member, it probably makes sense.
> > Look outside the TC if there's no-one on the TC willing to commit to the
> > role, perhaps?
> TIm Bell's board membership is coincidental to his user committee
> appointment. The user committee members are meant to be
> representatives of users, not the board or the TC. The companies and
> the ATC are pretty strongly represented within the governance
> structure already, and the user committee is meant to be a place for
> users and deployers who are not as directly represented.
Understood. I was thinking of the Board/TC representatives on the UC as
folks who would act as a bridge between the bodies - e.g. one easy way
for the TC to talk to the UC.
I totally agree that we don't want the UC filled with folks from the
Board or TC.
> I think Ryan fits the bill pretty well while also having a strong
> connection back to the development community. While I'm sure TC
> members would do fine in the role, I'm not sure any of the existing or
> potential members would do a *better* job than Ryan.
Absolutely not questioning Ryan's suitability for the the UC. And he's a
great candidate to help bootstrap it too.
Maybe we just discuss whether anyone is interested in representing the
TC on the UC after the election?