I fully agree - it was not made clear in the last board meeting that unless the board specifically requested a decision, the decision would be made by the foundation team. To find that a decision has been made and plans put in motion is disturbing. This is a significant change for OpenStack and should not be pushed through as a fait accompli. Best Regards Mark Baker On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 12:20 PM, Tim Bell <Tim.Bell@cern.ch> wrote:
While I am in favor of the proposal, it is a significant change and a quick item in the board/tc/uc meeting would seem reasonable and we might not all be able to make the larger discussion event ( https://www.openstack.org/summit/austin-2016/summit-schedule/events/9478)
I’ll add it to the agenda on the etherpad.
Tim
On 20/04/16 18:31, "Monty Taylor" <mordred@inaugust.com> wrote:
On 04/20/2016 10:54 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
Looking at the agenda at https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/6PuSKyUOHk
for
the TC/UC/Board meeting, there is no item for the potential split of the summit/design summit.
When do we need to make the decision by in order to plan future locations ?
My understanding (which is likely wrong) from the last meeting was that there was no requested decision from the board and that it was being handled by the foundation staff as part of their operational duties.
_______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
Foundation mailing list Foundation@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation