Open Stack

Anne Gentle wrote:
> If the stated goal is efficiency, is that in running the meetings or
> in gathering consensus? Or perhaps you mean efficiency in setting up
> the organization itself?

By efficiency I mean efficiency in running the meeting and keeping TC
members focused. I don't want the "PTL gets one seat" rule to result in
inefficient 20-members committees. I don't want the elected seats to
quickly become a minority just because we split projects into more
manageable parts.

But my ultimate goal is fairness. With all votes coming from elected
members, nobody gets "free seats". All votes have equal representative
power.

In the TC, I want the members to represent what "OpenStack" technically
is. When it comes to a vote, I don't want people to wear their company
hat (appointed seats) or their project hat (PTL seat). Everyone is
welcome in the discussion, but the final decision should be taken with
the good of "OpenStack" as a whole in mind.

Devin Carlen wrote:
> If our goal is improving the quality of code and cross project
> communication, then removing PTLs from the TC seems antithetical to that
> goal.

I hope my other recent answers in the thread make it clearer. A
fully-elected TC with a manageable, static number of members removes
imbalance in the value of a vote. The PTLs are still very much part of
the discussion.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Release Manager, OpenStack