openstack/election
Code Issues Proposed changes

Nomination for Monty Taylor to the TC

Browse Source 
Change-Id: Ica8cdc41f9a7ea036013f3541a60e4dfd8b04dc2
This commit is contained in:
Monty Taylor 2015-09-27 09:51:47 -05:00
parent 4618f25244
commit 51019f0326
1 changed files with 48 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

48
candidates/mitaka/TC/Monty_Taylor.txt Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
I would like to continue serving on the TC, if you'll have me.
Although past performance is no guarantee of future profits, I think it's
worth noting that I've been doing this for a while now. I was on the
precursor to the TC, the Project Policy Board. Over the time I've been
the instigator or a key player in several major initiatives, such as
Stackforge, the Project Testing Interface and The Big Tent.
Thing is, that really doesn't matter, because while understanding the past is
important if you want to avoid re-learning the same lessons, we need to be
firmly focused on the future, and to be willing to make changes as needed to
accomodate the reality we find ourselves in.
I think it's time for the TC to take a more active position on technical
design issues.
This past cycle, Sean and Anne wrote up a spec that came from the last summit
around standardization of the keystone catalog data. Doug dove in to issues
around Glance upload. Both are instances where clear technical leadership
and design was needed, and in both instances we understand that it goes hand in
hand with being clear to our deployers and end users about what it is that
we expect via interaction with DefCore.
I want to see more things likethat, and I'd like to be involved with moving
the TC another step down the road from being a "policy board" to being a
"technical committee".
On the social side, I'd like to work with people on figuring out how to
expand our capacity for trust across the project. We set up all of our
systems and culture initially to protect against bad-faith and antagonistic
behavior - but we've been doing this long enough now that I think the
assumption of bad and protective behavior is counter productive. We're never
going to get the big issues fixed if we can't land hard patches.
Finally, I think we need to re-think our mission.
The OpenStack Mission: to produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud
Computing platform that will meet the needs of public and private clouds
regardless of size, by being simple to implement and massively scalable.
That mission is about clouds, and I think it has completely forgotten a key
ingredient - users. Focusing on meeting the needs of the clouds themselves
has gotten us to an amazing place, but in order to take the next step we
have to start putting the consumers of OpenStack Clouds front and center in
our thinking.
Thank you for the trust you've placed in me so far, and I hope I've lived up
to it well enough for you to keep me around.