[OpenStack Foundation] PTG Board of Directors Meeting
Hi, I'd like to suggest that the board of directors meeting currently scheduled for February 26th be rescheduled. I think this came up the last time the board scheduled a meeting which conflicted with a Foundation event. Every 6 months, as many of us as can manage to find the time, funding, and travel approval to do so, fly to somewhere in the world to get together and make serious progress on these projects that we all work together on. It's a really big deal. We put a lot of effort into planning it beforehand, and we save up conversations which we know are difficult to have any other way for these events. The same is true for the board. What happens during the conference calls, and what happens at the face-to-face meetings are very different. Some of us have our feet in both worlds, and we're all the better for it. However, we can't do both at the same time. They are both too important. We have folks who are involved in many OpenStack projects as well as the board, and those projects will all suffer if these folks are unable to participate in our cross project collaboration. Likewise, the board discussions will lack important viewpoints if they don't attend. Scheduling the board meeting during the PTG sends a signal about how the board values the discussions we have there and the participation of folks engaged across our community. And as a practical matter, if we aren't able to have the discussions we need to at the PTG, we will need to find yet another place to have them -- a problem the PTG was intended to solve. -Jim
Jim, Thank you for communicating your concerns. We recognized the potential impact both positive and negative that a board meeting has at an event. This impact is not something that we take lightly. That’s why this topic is regularly discussed at the board meetings and via polls and emails. As the board discusses when and where to hold F2F board meetings it is not an easy decision and involves many different factors of consideration. The points you raise are a good sample and, interestingly, are arguably both reasons for and against holding a board meeting at events. For example, we do recognize the time impact of holding the meetings during an event but also, as you noted, that F2F discussions are needed for conversations which are difficult to have any other way. At the same time board members, as you pointed for all of us, have limited time, funding and travel approval. Over the many discussions for meeting dates and locations such limitations brings consensus back to holding them at the events. I (and the board members) do take your concern seriously. I want you to know that I have been and will continue to work with the staff and board members to try to schedule the meeting date, time, length and topic(s) schedule so as to minimize the impact as much as possible, enabling the board members to contribute to their key meetings and discussions at the event. Regards, AlanClark
-----Original Message----- From: James E. Blair [mailto:corvus@inaugust.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 3:02 PM To: foundation@lists.openstack.org Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] PTG Board of Directors Meeting
Hi,
I'd like to suggest that the board of directors meeting currently scheduled for February 26th be rescheduled.
I think this came up the last time the board scheduled a meeting which conflicted with a Foundation event.
Every 6 months, as many of us as can manage to find the time, funding, and travel approval to do so, fly to somewhere in the world to get together and make serious progress on these projects that we all work together on. It's a really big deal. We put a lot of effort into planning it beforehand, and we save up conversations which we know are difficult to have any other way for these events.
The same is true for the board. What happens during the conference calls, and what happens at the face-to-face meetings are very different.
Some of us have our feet in both worlds, and we're all the better for it. However, we can't do both at the same time. They are both too important. We have folks who are involved in many OpenStack projects as well as the board, and those projects will all suffer if these folks are unable to participate in our cross project collaboration. Likewise, the board discussions will lack important viewpoints if they don't attend.
Scheduling the board meeting during the PTG sends a signal about how the board values the discussions we have there and the participation of folks engaged across our community. And as a practical matter, if we aren't able to have the discussions we need to at the PTG, we will need to find yet another place to have them -- a problem the PTG was intended to solve.
-Jim
_______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
I would echo Jims concerns, but not just for people involved with the board, but for the entire community. As part of the four opens, I think it is important that the development and user community have the ability to attend, and listen to what happens at these meetings. By scheduling the meeting at the same time as PTG sessions it excludes a large group of our community from attending. What were the objections to running the meeting the day before, like is traditionally done before a summit? - Graham On 25/01/18 00:54, Alan Clark wrote:
Jim,
Thank you for communicating your concerns.
We recognized the potential impact both positive and negative that a board meeting has at an event. This impact is not something that we take lightly. That’s why this topic is regularly discussed at the board meetings and via polls and emails.
As the board discusses when and where to hold F2F board meetings it is not an easy decision and involves many different factors of consideration. The points you raise are a good sample and, interestingly, are arguably both reasons for and against holding a board meeting at events. For example, we do recognize the time impact of holding the meetings during an event but also, as you noted, that F2F discussions are needed for conversations which are difficult to have any other way. At the same time board members, as you pointed for all of us, have limited time, funding and travel approval. Over the many discussions for meeting dates and locations such limitations brings consensus back to holding them at the events.
I (and the board members) do take your concern seriously. I want you to know that I have been and will continue to work with the staff and board members to try to schedule the meeting date, time, length and topic(s) schedule so as to minimize the impact as much as possible, enabling the board members to contribute to their key meetings and discussions at the event.
Regards, AlanClark
-----Original Message----- From: James E. Blair [mailto:corvus@inaugust.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 3:02 PM To: foundation@lists.openstack.org Subject: [OpenStack Foundation] PTG Board of Directors Meeting
Hi,
I'd like to suggest that the board of directors meeting currently scheduled for February 26th be rescheduled.
I think this came up the last time the board scheduled a meeting which conflicted with a Foundation event.
Every 6 months, as many of us as can manage to find the time, funding, and travel approval to do so, fly to somewhere in the world to get together and make serious progress on these projects that we all work together on. It's a really big deal. We put a lot of effort into planning it beforehand, and we save up conversations which we know are difficult to have any other way for these events.
The same is true for the board. What happens during the conference calls, and what happens at the face-to-face meetings are very different.
Some of us have our feet in both worlds, and we're all the better for it. However, we can't do both at the same time. They are both too important. We have folks who are involved in many OpenStack projects as well as the board, and those projects will all suffer if these folks are unable to participate in our cross project collaboration. Likewise, the board discussions will lack important viewpoints if they don't attend.
Scheduling the board meeting during the PTG sends a signal about how the board values the discussions we have there and the participation of folks engaged across our community. And as a practical matter, if we aren't able to have the discussions we need to at the PTG, we will need to find yet another place to have them -- a problem the PTG was intended to solve.
-Jim
_______________________________________________ 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
On 01/25/2018 09:44 AM, Graham Hayes wrote:
What were the objections to running the meeting the day before, like is traditionally done before a summit?
Actually, it was the other way around: Monday during the PTG was raised as an option at the Sydney F2F board meeting, and no one objected. We did discuss it, and there were a mixture of factors involved. Originally we were planning for this meeting to be joint with the TC and UC again, and would have automatically excluded Monday as an option for that. But, when it dropped back to more of a procedural meeting, there were fewer conflicts. And, while we didn't have to do the meeting at the PTG, about half of the board members were planning to be at the PTG anyway, and for the rest co-locating means they get more contact with the technical side of the project than they might naturally tend to get. Personally, I didn't object to Monday because in the past I've found doing a full day of board meetings on Sunday before a full week of technical meetings to be a bit grueling. I know for others meeting on Monday meant they could spend Saturday with their families before traveling to the PTG on Sunday. AFAIK, this is the first time we've tried this pattern, and we may not repeat it. But, it did seem worth trying. Allison
On 27/01/18 09:21, Allison Randal wrote:
On 01/25/2018 09:44 AM, Graham Hayes wrote:
What were the objections to running the meeting the day before, like is traditionally done before a summit?
Actually, it was the other way around: Monday during the PTG was raised as an option at the Sydney F2F board meeting, and no one objected. We did discuss it, and there were a mixture of factors involved. Originally we were planning for this meeting to be joint with the TC and UC again, and would have automatically excluded Monday as an option for that. But, when it dropped back to more of a procedural meeting, there were fewer conflicts. And, while we didn't have to do the meeting at the PTG, about half of the board members were planning to be at the PTG anyway, and for the rest co-locating means they get more contact with the technical side of the project than they might naturally tend to get.
These are all very good reasons to have it at the PTG - I am not disagreeing with that portion. I just don't remember a decision at the SYD meeting about the day - I remember a short discussion and moving on. I have tried to keep up to date with board developments, but for a normal member of the community, this is very hard to do with actually dialing in or attending - and I would be doing the projects I work on a disservice by missing PTG sessions for this board meeting.
Personally, I didn't object to Monday because in the past I've found doing a full day of board meetings on Sunday before a full week of technical meetings to be a bit grueling. I know for others meeting on Monday meant they could spend Saturday with their families before traveling to the PTG on Sunday.
AFAIK, this is the first time we've tried this pattern, and we may not repeat it. But, it did seem worth trying.
I would personally support not doing it again, (or if possible this time either).
Allison
_______________________________________________ Foundation mailing list Foundation@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
participants (4)
-
Alan Clark
-
Allison Randal
-
corvus＠inaugust.com
-
Graham Hayes