[OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates

Gil Yehuda gyehuda at yahoo-inc.com
Wed Aug 1 21:24:46 UTC 2012


Monty, 
I don't think the question is whether an individual who is committed to the community should stand in accusation simply because they happen to be employed.  Surely you, Soren, and many others will do more than your fair share of balancing your loyalty to the corporation who pays you, and your community who respects you.  This equation is part of every open source community member's psyche who is employed by a company. (For more ramblings on this topic on this read: http://www.gilyehuda.com/2012/01/23/two-opposites-of-trust/)

I see a larger issue, not of the individual committed to the project, but of the maintaining this balance at scale.  When a company is perceived as over-representing their interests, they invite an erosion of community trust.  This does not cast doubt on any one individual, especially those who have clearly been great community members. But it does invite speculation about the ability for any individual who is in a smaller company to have a voice.  I've seen this in other Open Source activities and we should take steps to prevent this well-known pattern from negatively impacting this one.  

Let me put it this way: Let's not repeat other people's mistakes. Let's make new ones of our own.

gil yehuda
director of open source and standards, Yahoo! Inc.
gyehuda at yahoo-inc.com | (408) 336-4857


-----Original Message-----
From: Monty Taylor [mailto:mordred at inaugust.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 2:04 PM
To: Soren Hansen
Cc: foundation at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates

On 08/01/2012 03:48 PM, Soren Hansen wrote:
> 2012/8/1 Benjamin Black <b at b3k.us>:
>> Even further, why are employees of platinum and gold member companies 
>> allows to run at all given that the point of the individual seats is 
>> to expand representation to include those unable to pay to play?
> 
> Just like my ramblings on the Internet are a manifestation of my own 
> views and not those of my employer, the inverse holds true as well:
> Cisco does not represent me. I've worked for no less than three 
> companies during my involvement with OpenStack. I have much more 
> history with OpenStack than I do with Cisco. Why on Earth should I not 
> be allowed to run for the board of directors?

I could not possibly agree more with Soren on this - and I think anyone who knows either of us will attest that, from the moment we both started working on helping set up this project we have both consistently acted with the interests of the project in mind. I have regularly told both Rackspace and HP that they are wrong in choices they have made, and I have fought for what I personally believe is right for OpenStack as a project. If I am elected to the board I can promise you that my actions will have not be those of a puppet sat there to do as his employer tells him - and I will expect that if I move companies again, I will not only retain my seat, but I will retain my ability to be re-elected.

If anything, any Platinum member for whom I might be employed is getting the short end of the stick, because without me as an employee, they might be more able to put people on the board with more of a mind to represent their business interests.

Monty

_______________________________________________
Foundation mailing list
Foundation at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation



More information about the Foundation mailing list