Friday, 2017-06-16

*** emagana has quit IRC00:08
*** hongbin has quit IRC00:38
*** jpich has joined #openstack-tc07:50
*** sdague has joined #openstack-tc10:56
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc11:43
*** cdent has quit IRC12:01
ttxI think the github mirroring is part of the problem, not necessarily *the* problem. It just reinforces people who like to think "big tent" means "anything goes"12:03
ttxEveryone seems to agree we need to stop using "big tent" terminology. But it's just hard to displace a popular term if all you give to replace it is "official projects" and "not official projects".12:04
ttxWe basically have tried to remove usage of the term for the last year, in favor of official/unofficial, and it clearly didn't stick12:04
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc12:04
ttxSolutions include: branding the negative space with a catchy name, to reinforce the definition of the positive space. Or get rid of the negative space altogether12:05
mugsiebut ..  the solution is to just remove everything apart from nova + friends, right?12:06
ttxmugsie: i don't think taht would solve the problem at all. It would actually reinforce it12:06
ttx(i.e. increase the size and complexity of the negative space)12:07
mugsiei do agree, that for outside people, the shared namespace (on github especially) is an issue, one that having stackforge helped with12:07
mugsiepeople are used to github orgs being a homognous thing12:07
ttxRight. I don't think it's specifically a github problem, but the way we handle github certainly reinforces the issue rather than helps mitigate it12:07
mugsieand now, as a result <server>/org/repos style URLs force association12:08
mugsieeven when server != github.com12:08
ttxanyway, that's what I get when I wake and find the openstack-dev list a bit too dead12:10
mugsieso, branding of the negitive space is something that I like12:10
mugsiegit revert <kill stackforge commit> ?12:11
mugsiethere is defnitly use for the negitave space12:11
mugsiee.g. os-api-ref12:11
ttxmugsie: it's more than that though. We also renamed repositories, and simplified the life of the infra team12:11
mugsietrue - but right now there is talk of 2 gerrits12:12
ttxjust exploring the solution space12:13
cdentI think we haven't properly explored the problem space yet. It's too soon for solution space.12:19
cdentBut then I guess I always think that.12:19
cdentBut that may be because it is always true.12:19
smcginnisIf the main root problem is no one can answer "what is openstack?", is it more of a marketing issue that we just need www.o.o to be more clear.12:31
smcginnisLike right on the landing page.12:31
smcginnisAnd once we have "constellations" in place, this is a storage cloud OpenStack, this is a container OpenStack, etc.12:31
ttxsmcginnis: it's just one aspect of it. In the workgroup (which you could join!) we identified two lines of work -- producing maps, and evolving the terminology12:32
ttxThe mapping will help answering "what is openstack"12:33
ttxEvolving the terminology will reduce bad assumptions and confusion12:33
smcginnisttx: Maybe having the maps will make evolving the terminology easier? A pictures worth a 1000 words?12:33
smcginnisttx: Which workgroup is that, BTW?12:33
ttxthe maps we have currently are pretty bad. So is the infinite list of 60 projects in alpha order12:34
ttxsmcginnis: It's a Board+TC+UC workgroup12:34
ttxfrom that workshop in Boston12:34
smcginnisttx: Yeah, a big dump of semi-meaningless names certainly doesn't help.12:34
ttxNext meeting will be at the Board+TC+UC meeting around Denver PTG12:34
smcginnisttx: OK, great. I'll watch for any extra activity there.12:34
ttx gives pointers12:35
smcginnisWhat happened to line 60? :)12:36
cdentEvery time we bring topics like these up people get really angry about a whole ton of different things. Is that just what we're going to accept as normal and deal with it?12:37
ttxsmcginnis: I think it said "big tent" but at the same time someone said we need to stop using the word12:37
* ttx fixes12:37
smcginnisAh obscurity through multilinguism.12:37
ttxcdent: yes, it's weird that every time you talk about small tweaks to governance people want to use it as a reason to rediscuss the fundamentals12:38
ttxThey could raise their own threads, but prefer to haunt yours12:38
smcginnisttx: I remember the conversation during the Board+TC+UC meeting, but are there additional workgroup meetings going on?12:38
ttxsmcginnis: actually there hasn't been one since :)12:39
cdentno, that's just it, it is not weird. What it shows is that people either do not know or do not agree on the fundamentals. That's a real problem.12:39
ttxCurrently writing a status report to that group memebrs, in case you want me to CC you12:39
cdentmaybe just send it to the tc list?12:40
smcginniscdent: I wonder if we can ever get consensus on a platform the is inherently meant to be as flexible.12:40
smcginnis*that is12:40
cdentpeople don't even agree on that :)12:40
ttxalso some people just don't want to hear the answers12:40
smcginnisTrue and true.12:40
ttxThat was part of the "principles" exercise, trying to write a few base things down12:41
cdentOn a related thing, something has been revealed to me as I've listened to message from other people departing mirantis, or saying bye bye to me departing: there are a large number of people who find "working upstream" to be incredibly frustrating and exhausting and are relieved that they've been forced to find an exit12:41
ttxbut then people continue to say things like "we never defined if openstack is a collection of independent projects or if there is more to it", despite having a principle saying "OpenStck first, Project Teams second"12:41
ttx(Company third)12:42
ttxAlso, much easier to bitch on Twitter rather than be part of the solution12:42
ttxbut then, I'm an old grumpy man12:42
smcginniscdent: :/12:44
smcginniscdent: Are we really that difficult?12:44
smcginniscdent: I mean, I know some parts are, but overall, this has been a pretty easy group to come in to I thought.12:45
cdentwell, to be fair, most of these people are talking about nova, and nova's issues are systemic rather the result of any particular factor12:45
smcginnisttx: Grumpy old men unite!12:45
smcginniscdent: Oh, well, I guess I can't argue too much about nova being difficult. :)12:45
* smcginnis is mostly kinda sorta joking...12:46
ttxWorking in large open source communities can indeed be frustrating. But then there are benefits too.12:52
fungipeople do indeed often feel the same way about working on the linux kernel, or gnome, or <insert large project here>; but where our situation tends to be more unique is that for most of those projects the people who are working on them do so because it's a passion of theirs, not because their employer has told them to go there and work on specific things (though there is still some of that in any large13:29
*** cdent has quit IRC13:30
fungiwe tend to end up with a higher percentage, i think, of people forced to work on free software who aren't naturally drawn to the culture and challenges that entails13:32
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc13:32
fungii have a feeling most of the people who are "relieved" to have an excuse to do something other than work upstream on openstack aren't relieved because they now have sufficient free time to go contribute to other free software projects they enjoy more13:33
fungithey're more likely relieved that now they can go do something other than work upstream on a free software project, because that isn't actually something they enjoy anyway13:34
*** bauzas has joined #openstack-tc13:35
cdentfungi: that's not the impression I'm getting from the people I've been talking with. I'm sure there are plenty like that, but alot of these people are simply exhausted: it's just too damn hard (they think) to make headway13:35
fungii can certainly understand that too, but i may be biased by being given levity to choose to work on things where i can make headway instead13:36
cdentI agree that the strange economics of how people are often engaged in openstack make for complexity13:36
sdaguefungi: I disagree on the passion front. I think it's a wrong duality to impose, having worked on lots of different open source things over the years there are very many different motivations people work on things, and it's a big giant greyspace slider of intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivations.14:18
fungifair enough. i know for me the frustration is generally tempered by my desire to be given the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to free software14:19
fungiand if i wasn't doing this, i'd be looking or another nonprofit to fund me to work on some other free software14:20
sdagueright, which is cool.14:21
sdaguebut, one of the biggest mistakes that I've seen people make in group dynamics is assuming what motivates them is what motivates other people. And we all have very different motivations.14:22
fungisure. in this case i assume what motivates them is not what motivates me14:25
sdaguefungi: yep14:27
sdaguecdent: I feel like you often state that nothing can be done if we don't all agree on all the fundamentals of a project. But I reject that. We don't all need to be fully aligned on everything to make meaningful progress and contributions.14:31
sdaguethere is lots of common ground if people look for it14:31
cdentone sec, on the phone, but that's not what I think14:33
cdentsdague: It's actually really unfortunate that I've somehow given you that impression. I'm not after agreement. I'm after acknowledgement that there is disagreement. From the acknowlegement we can make progress on making decisions which have some staying power.14:39
cdentWhen we gloss over the disagreement we (in my experience) make decisions which tend to be weak14:39
cdentI also think that one of the ways of finding common ground is by being willing to hear people's different perspectives and from that finding out that common ground is already there.14:40
cdentTake, for example, the fact that ttx once thought I was just trying to stir shit up, and then after we both managed to hear each other for real we had mostly the same (or at least closely aligned) goals.14:41
fungigranetd, stirring shit up does sometimes help ;)14:42
fungier, granted14:42
cdentFundamentally my approach is an effort to get to real reasons why things are as they are, because when we do not, we just do the same shit over and over and over again.14:43
sdaguecdent: that assumes that in the process of focussing on all the differences and disagreements you don't effectively chase off a lot of people14:46
sdaguethat you can't solve goals without14:46
cdentI know that's how you feel, and I guess I disagree in some fashion. Which fashion I'm not entirely sure. It may be a difference of opinion on what the truly long term goals are and their relative merit compared to short term goals. I'm not sure.14:48
cdentI also think your position has a lot to do with where you sit in the environment.14:48
cdent(as does mine)14:48
*** lbragstad has quit IRC14:51
*** lbragstad has joined #openstack-tc14:56
cdentIn any case, I think it is way overstating it to say that there's been "focus" on "all the differences and disagreements". Every now and again in an email thread I ask some questions. That's not focus. That's curiosity.14:57
*** cdent has quit IRC15:00
*** cdent has joined #openstack-tc15:02
*** jpich has quit IRC16:01
*** cdent has quit IRC16:19
*** sdague has quit IRC23:17

Generated by 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!