Open Stack

On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 15:28 -0700, Benjamin Black wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 14:52 -0700, Benjamin Black wrote:
> >> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 14:26 -0700, Benjamin Black wrote:
> >> >> One of the growing pains of moving from a tightly-controlled project
> >> >> run by a company to an open and inclusive one run by a foundation is
> >> >> accepting that there are no longer any individual entitlements,
> >> >> regardless of contribution.
> >> >
> >> > Say what? In order for the project to be open and inclusive, employed
> >> > contributors must at all times represent their employer rather than
> >> > themselves? I must be misunderstanding your point?
> >> >
> >>
> >> You are.  As part of being open and inclusive, major contributors to
> >> the project must be prepared to not get the organizational leadership
> >> positions they want or feel they deserve.
> >
> > That's an odd statement. OpenStack prides itself on being a meritocracy
> > where leadership positions are awarded based on how much the individual
> > deserves it based on their contributions.
> >
> 
> We're voting for the board, it's not a meritocracy, no matter how much
> we might like it to be.

I would hope that people will vote for directors based on the
contribution they think a candidate will make to the mission of the
foundation.

Why would anyone vote someone to the board who they don't think would
make a valuable contribution to the foundation?

So, absolutely these 8 seats should be awarded by the foundation
individual membership based on merit.

> >> The elections for the
> >> individual board seats is not a referendum on the contributions or
> >> value to the project of the nominees and should not be turned into
> >> one.  Similarly, being appointed to the board does not also make
> >> someone a committer (and glad we all should be of that).
> >
> > The election is a referendum on the candidate's value as a director on
> > the board of the foundation. That is clearly separate from any
> > candidate's value as a contributor of code the project.
> >
> > I would expect those who contribute most to technical leadership of the
> > project to be awarded seats on the Technical Committee. And, similarly,
> > those who contribute most to the mission of the foundation to be awarded
> > with seats on the board.
> >
> 
> Board seats are not awarded.

These 8 seats are awarded by Individual Members through their voting in
the election.

> They are purchased by companies or won by individuals.  My commitment
> is to maximizing inclusion of the community who are otherwise excluded
> due to the cost of the paid seats.  2/3 of the board is there to
> represent the member companies. That seems quite sufficient, to me.

Completely agree. The Individual Member directors should represent the
interests of the project and all the Individual Members, not their
company.

Mark.