Open Stack

> On Mar 12, 2019, at 5:39 PM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote:
> 
> Jonathan Bryce <jonathan at openstack.org> writes:
> 
>>> On Mar 12, 2019, at 7:40 AM, Doug Hellmann <doug at doughellmann.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> <Arkady.Kanevsky at dell.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> Mohammed,
>>>> Is the goal to have a doc where we collect feedback per pilot project from Board? TC? Community?
>>> 
>>> We were asked specifically about the process the TC preferred for being
>>> involved in the evaluation of new OIP applications, in order to handle
>>> the step where the leadership groups of other confirmed projects have a
>>> chance to provide their input. 
>> 
>> Thanks for chiming in here Doug. This specific request is to the TC as the process allows for official input from other confirmed projects’ governance bodies when a new project is being considered for confirmation. This could be anything from a simple email to me and Alan, a formal resolution from the TC, or even a decision to not have an opinion. Since we’re just setting up this process, I was hoping to hear how the TC would like to be involved so we can make that part of the workflow for each of the projects that come up.
>> 
>> We will be having the next Board meeting on April 8 (4 weeks from yesterday), where we will do an initial review of pilot projects that wish to apply. At this point, that could include Kata Containers and Zuul, although we are just starting to work with the projects on their portion of the confirmation process. I think if the TC wishes to provide feedback on either of those projects, it would be ideal to have it ahead of the April 8th meeting.
>> 
>> Jonathan
> 
> Can you give us an idea of what format that review meeting will take? Is
> the team going to put together a slide deck, for example? Having
> whatever materials they will be presenting available for the TC to
> review seems like a good start, although I don't know whether that's
> possible given the current schedule.

The projects are currently preparing slide decks to present during the review meeting. I think it’s unlikely that they will be ready very far in advance of the meeting, but I can check on the progress and timeline.


> What sorts of input would the board be interested in hearing? Are there
> specific questions, or is it more a matter of looking for general
> comments?

I’d love to have any of the board members chime in on this one, but I’ll also share my perspective. This request is admittedly open-ended since it’s intended to allow for a wide variety of projects to come through the process. If we look at the cases of Kata Containers and Zuul specifically, I could see the TC having some general thoughts (or not) about Kata Containers and potential integration with OpenStack projects or how it fits technically into an open source cloud landscape. For Zuul, I would imagine there might be a more detailed level of opinion or comment that the TC might have given the origin of Zuul and the continued extensive use as part of the OpenStack project development process. Perhaps things like support for the utility of Zuul as a major user, comments on the developer experience of the project.

The model for this in my mind is the amicus curiae brief that is submitted to a court when a third party feels like they may have helpful additional information or perspective to guide a decision.

Jonathan