diff --git a/candidates/newton/TC/thierry_carrez.txt b/candidates/newton/TC/thierry_carrez.txt new file mode 100644 index 00000000..bbce704f --- /dev/null +++ b/candidates/newton/TC/thierry_carrez.txt @@ -0,0 +1,80 @@ +Hi everyone, + +I'd like to submit my candidacy for reelection on the Technical Committee. +For those who don't know me yet, my name is Thierry Carrez, I use "ttx" as +my IRC nickname. I'm currently employed by the OpenStack Foundation as its +Director of Engineering, which basically means I'm running the team in +charge of ensuring the long-term health of the upstream OpenStack open source +project and its governance. Handling the Technical Committee is my primary +activity: 6 months ago I left the PTL role for the Release Management Team in +order to be able to focus as much as possible on the TC. + +One year ago I ran for election with the goal of having the TC "step out of +the way"[1]. The idea was to remove the TC from the critical path of getting +things done, and encourage a "ask for forgiveness, rather than permission" +attitude in our community. I like to think we were successful at this. Project +teams can now more easily add git repositories as they need them, they also +end up asserting some tags by themselves, and the TC has generally moved to +being an appeals board in case of disputes, rather than a procedural barrier +in getting things done. + +Here are the three priorities for my upcoming mandate, if the electorate +chooses to reelect me to the TC: + +1/ Cleaning up the big tent + +The transition to the "big tent" governance model is now finished, with all +the expected projects now officially part of the OpenStack community. The +big tent is all about community: answering the "are you one of us" question. +Our approach there was to be inclusive and assume good faith, especially as +we caught up on documenting what we meant by "the OpenStack Way". Over the +past year we created the Project Team Guide[2], which clearly explains what is +expected of official project teams. I think it's time for us to look back at +all those projects we have in the tent, reach out to those who are lacking, +and not hesitate to remove the ones that are not following our common community +practices from the list of official project teams. Demoting a project used to +be particularly painful, with costly git repository renames crating disruption +on the demoted projects. But now that all projects hosted under our +infrastructure (official and unofficial) use the same namespace, this cost and +disruption are very limited, so cleaning up the big tent is now possible. + +2/ Defining the limits of the big tent + +The TC recently had two project team applications for which we had no good +answer: Poppy and Tacker. Those resulted in close (and somewhat arbitrary) +votes as each TC member tried to interpret the mission statement words and +what we stand for. In the case of Poppy, there was the question of whether a +service that proxies to non-OpenStack commercial services could be considered +part of "OpenStack", without an open source reference implementation to do +end-to-end testing against. In the case of Tacker, there was the question +of a service standing on top of other OpenStack services to present a +domain-specific API tailored to a specific use case or industry. Should +that still be "OpenStack", or just something that consumes OpenStack ? I'd +like the TC to take a step back and explore those two questions, without the +pressure of a specific project team addition. Clarifying the rules may result +in some official projects to be demoted to "unofficial" status as they would +not fit the rules anymore. + +3/ Launching the new separated event for project team members + +We recently started the discussion[3] on splitting the "design summit" into +wider community feedback / requirements-gathering sessions (that would +happen at the main Summit) and a specific event for project team members +to gather in a co-located venue to come up with a plan and organize its +execution. We still have a long way to go (and not that much time) to discuss +the format and the timing of this new event, and I expect the Newton membership +of the TC to help with taking quick decisions there. The next step here will +be a cross-project workshop at the Design Summit in Austin to discuss the +current plan and go deeper in the details. + +Those are my three priorities for Newton and Ocata, and this is what I'll push +the Technical Committee towards if I'm elected. + +Thank you all for your consideration ! + +[1] http://ttx.re/stepping-out-of-the-way.html +[2] http://docs.openstack.org/project-team-guide/ +[3] http://ttx.re/splitting-out-design-summit.html + +-- +Thierry Carrez (ttx)