[OpenStack Foundation] Nomination Process Updates

Duncan McGreggor duncan at dreamhost.com
Fri Aug 3 00:29:12 UTC 2012


On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Joe Heck <Joe.Heck at nebula.com> wrote:
> nice list Duncan - I like the concept and where you're going with it. I think it's also worth having a free-text block as well (~500-1000 chars?)

To give a sense of lengths, my own description (admittedly brief, but
also sufficient... I hope!) of my interests/plans around OpenStack
comes in at 360 chars.

d

>
> On Aug 2, 2012, at 5:13 PM, Duncan McGreggor <duncan at dreamhost.com>
>  wrote:
>
>> What about checkboxes for areas in which one has contributed?
>>
>> [ ] commits to one or more projects
>> [ ] updates to wiki pages
>> [ ] attendance at conferences
>> [ ] participation in hack-ins/bug-squash days
>> [ ] community/project infrastructure support
>> [ ] advocacy in social media (blog posts, tweets, etc.)
>> [ ] ... other options?
>>
>> I would hope that not checking these wouldn't prevent one from
>> becoming a member, but it would provide *a* gauge to assess certain
>> levels of involvement.
>>
>> I do like the idea of requiring a certain amount of text to describe
>> one's interest in OpenStack and intentions for use and/or planned
>> contributions. Maybe the text provided should be longer than 100-200
>> chars?
>>
>> d
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Lauren Sell <lauren at openstack.org> wrote:
>>> What questions should be required for the public profile?  The current signup process asks for affiliation, statement of interest and which projects you're working on.
>>>
>>> A couple of ideas on what the additional questions could be -- (1) how long have you been working on OpenStack or (2) what have you or do you plan to contribute to the project.  We could also force more long form answers afround the affiliation or statement of interest with a minimum character requirement.  Again, just looking for ideas here.
>>>
>>> The goal is to make sure everyone voting is really serious.
>>>
>>> On Aug 2, 2012, at 1:21 PM, Matt Joyce wrote:
>>>
>>>> I like laurens idea as well.  Making folks jump through a few hoops to
>>>> demonstrate their loyalty to the party will cut back on the
>>>> astroturfing comrades.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Mark Collier <mark at openstack.org> wrote:
>>>>> I like Lauren's idea as well. I think we can act on it pretty quickly as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Aug 2, 2012, at 7:46 AM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Just a random thought on the criteria for being an individual member ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 22:16 -0400, Mark Collier wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The definition of "individual members"
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The wiki:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> Characteristics of Individual Members:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Contribute to OpenStack in a variety of ways such as code,
>>>>>>> documentation, translations, bug reports, testing, project
>>>>>>> infrastructure, advocacy, marketing, community management, legal
>>>>>>> guidance
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>> and in the by laws [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "2.2 Individual Members.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> (a) Individual Members must be natural persons. Individual Members may
>>>>>>> be any natural person who has an interest in the purpose of the
>>>>>>> Foundation
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The wiki clearly says that individual members should have contributed to
>>>>>> OpenStack in some form. I like that, and I have no problem with the
>>>>>> definition of "contributed" being extremely inclusive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, the bylaws watered that down to "has an interest" and AFAIK
>>>>>> we're taking "applied for membership" as enough to demonstrate an
>>>>>> interest.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Given the 700+ RAX and HP members, was this too inclusive? Would all of
>>>>>> those meet the criteria in the wiki? If not, how can we correct the
>>>>>> process now or in the future?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I like Lauren's idea of making people fill in a "why you're interested
>>>>>> in OpenStack" blurb and publishing it. I also like the approach of
>>>>>> having an open membership committee[1] with clear guidelines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Mark.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] - e.g. https://live.gnome.org/MembershipCommittee/
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Foundation mailing list
>>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Foundation mailing list
>>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foundation mailing list
>> Foundation at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foundation
>>
>
>



More information about the Foundation mailing list