openstack/election
Code Issues Proposed changes

Added Neutron Pike candidacy of Ihar Hrachyshka

Browse Source 
Change-Id: I4289bb31ad35d05d0a1a9aba9a574bcc23eab82a
This commit is contained in:
Ihar Hrachyshka 2017-01-11 13:28:43 +00:00
parent 79c2dbc186
commit ba074adafa
1 changed files with 115 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

115
candidates/pike/Neutron/ihrachys.txt Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
Hi team,
I would like to propose my PTL candidacy for Pike.
Some of you already know me. If not, here is my brief OpenStack bio. I
joined the community back in Havana, and managed to stick around till
now. During the time, I fit several project roles like serving as a
Neutron liaison of different kinds (stable, oslo, release), fulfilling
my Neutron core reviewer duties, taking part in delivering some
longstanding features, leading QoS and upgrades subteams, as well as
being part of Neutron Drivers team. I also took part in miscellaneous
cross project efforts.
I think my experience gives me broad perspective on how the OpenStack
community and more specifically Networking works, and what is expected
from its PTL.
First, let me describe my vision of PTL role.
* It's not only about technical intricacies. It's also about people
and procedures that make the project run smoothly day by day. The
role of PTL is in empowering other team members, keeping track of
any roadblocks and inconveniences that the team have, and working
on streamlining workflow.
* It's about delegation. We should make it a habit to look at the list
of potential candidates for core membership and other leadership and
administrative positions not just in times we are short on existing
members.
* PTL should be transparent and replaceable. I will work with outgoing
PTL to capture oral wisdom and state of affairs into a publicly
accessible project dashboard, and I will continue sharing such
information with the team on constant basis. The project dashboard
will give you answers to questions like: what's the project
direction? what are current priorities, and where does each stand?
what's on PTL and Drivers' mind? which cross-project and governance
initiatives are currently worked on? etc.
As PTL, I'd like to focus on the following things:
* Speed up the RFE/spec process. We should manage RFE/spec review
pipeline in such a way so that initiatives that are given a green
light on writing up design details get timely feedback and can get
past spec process in reasonable time. At the same time we should be
honest to the community not to accept proposals that have high risk
to fall through cracks due to lack of manpower. I will encourage
usage of reviewday and other tools to keep focus of the team. We
will mull over the idea of virtual code sprints for high demand
topics.
* Continue Stadium program without drastic changes of direction.
Thanks to Armando, we filled the Stadium with tangible meaning. I
want us to build on top of that foundation to drive consistency and
high quality standards between participating projects.
* Support Marketplace rework. With huge number of drivers and plugins
available for Neutron, it became hard for operators to pick the
right one and for vendors to advertise their features. There is
strong vendor interest to improve situation there. We should boost
Feature Classification work, and integrate it with how third party
CI systems report test results so that they become useful for
Marketplace.
* Introduce Gate Keeper role. We've recently made significant progress
in how we deal with gate: we expanded coverage to new types of jobs,
we utilize Grafana and other community tools, we review gate-failure
tagged bugs during weekly meetings. Sadly, sometimes gate becomes
unstable, and it slows down work progress for everyone. In such
cases, it's all about timely addressing the issue. For that matter,
I will work with the team on defining a new Gate Keeper role that
would help prioritizing current gate issues, as well as proactively
work with the team on gate instability vectors. I believe clear
ownership is the key.
* Make centralized L3 legacy indeed. We have DVR and HA in tree for
quite some time. Both technologies are now mature enough, and are no
longer mutually exclusive. Sadly, they are still second class
citizens in our own gate. My belief is we should give users a clear
signal that old L3 is indeed legacy by switching our jobs to DVR+HA
where applicable. I am sure that will surface some previously
unknown issues, but we'll be ready to tackle them. While it's never
black or white, I suggest we prioritize this work over adding new
major L3 features.
* Support existing maintenance initiatives. I'd like us to close
neutron-lib saga in Pike, and consider neutron-lib switch for a
requirement to all Stadium projects starting from Queens. We should
also close OSC transition during Pike.
* Explore alternative ways to evolve Neutron API. Piling up
extensions and allowing third parties to completely change core
resource behaviour is not ideal, and now that api-ref and API
consolidation effort in neutron-lib are closer to completion, we may
have better answers to outstanding questions than during previous
attempts to crack the nut. I would like to restart the discussion
some time during Pike.
Now, you may ask, it's a nice list of things to do, but we can't
manage to handle all of that in one cycle, can we? Well, some of those
bullet points are procedural (RFE process tweaks, next Stadium steps,
Gate Keeper role) and, with team support, won't take too much time to
adopt (yes I am an optimist...), and hopefully will deliver the fruits
in the same cycle.
As for technical bits, it's mostly ongoing work, and I am sure we will
still have time for other work that our bright contributors tend to
deliver. Also, it's in everyone's interest to get gate into better
shape.
Of course, some of the goals are long stretching and may spill over
into next cycles. It's ok as long as we agree on the path. Do we?
Thanks for attention,
Ihar