openstack-poc team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: User Committee appointee
Anyone want to hop in IRC and talk about it for a few minutes?
On Sep 11, 2012, at 7:02 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> 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?