85 lines
4.8 KiB
Plaintext
85 lines
4.8 KiB
Plaintext
Hi,
|
|
|
|
I am submitting my candidacy for the OpenStack Technical Committee.
|
|
|
|
I have been contributing to OpenStack since the Havana cycle [1][2], mainly in
|
|
Designate. I have also been involved with the TC, and its meetings since
|
|
Designate applied for incubation all the way back in Atlanta (the first time
|
|
we were there).
|
|
|
|
Over the last 6 months I have become more involved in the TC, and have been
|
|
an active contributor to TC discussions (both on IRC and in person) and
|
|
governance [3].
|
|
|
|
I have been PTL for Designate for Mitaka, Newton, Ocata, Queens and Rocky
|
|
cycles, and a core for a longer period. I believe my experience working in a
|
|
younger, smaller project within OpenStack is a benefit. Along with the
|
|
experience of working on software as an end user of OpenStack I can help us
|
|
ensure the Technical Committee is mindful of the unique challenges these
|
|
projects and users can face.
|
|
|
|
With the broadening of the scope of the OpenStack Foundation, I believe that
|
|
it is an important part of the TC's role to have robust, and frank discussions
|
|
with the Board of Directors and I believe that I have done a reasonable job of
|
|
summarizing [4][5] what happens at the Board of Directors meetings to the
|
|
community over the last 6 months.
|
|
|
|
The need for the candid discussions is not restricted to the Foundation and the
|
|
board - the new strategic focus areas that the foundation is expanding into
|
|
need our technical leadership to engage with them and ensure that we are all
|
|
working towards the overall goal of the foundation and promoting open
|
|
infrastructure. We need to make collaborating, and sharing resources and
|
|
expertise where it makes sense a priority.
|
|
|
|
What it does not mean is changing what OpenStack is nor changing OpenStack to
|
|
cater for a single use case. This is a situation where better education of how
|
|
OpenStack and it components can be used and orchestrated is needed, and a lot
|
|
of this work should be directed by the TC. I don't think the TC will always (or
|
|
even most of the time) be the correct people to engage, but I think we should
|
|
lead the way by finding the correct people with the knowledge and experience,
|
|
and helping support them and provide them with a platform to provide guidance
|
|
to these groups.
|
|
|
|
When it comes to pushing forward the TC vision[6] I think the community has
|
|
made great steps forward to realizing it, on all but one section. We engage
|
|
with groups like the CNCF, and specifically Kubernetes and help drive OpenStack
|
|
adoption with first class support for the OpenStack Cloud Provider, the Cinder
|
|
Container Storage Interface and other projects. We still need to find a way to
|
|
show the world what a top tier private open source infrastructure of components
|
|
like OpenStack, Kubernetes, Cloud Foundry or OpenShift looks like, and helping
|
|
companies understand why this is the way forward for their infrastructure.
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately, helping users, deployers and C(T|I)Os understand this would be
|
|
easier with well written and and clearly documented "constellations" - I have
|
|
always found talking in the abstract is a lot more difficult than discussing
|
|
something tangible. For the last 5 years I have worked on product teams
|
|
building products based on OpenStack, Kubernetes and Cloud Foundry, and I think
|
|
this experience will be a great asset in developing our first generation of
|
|
constellations, which is something I think we need to focus on for the next
|
|
term of the TC.
|
|
|
|
I think that having constellations will also help us solve the perennial
|
|
question of what OpenStack is. By having sets of projects, we can show that
|
|
OpenStack is extremely flexible - and that there are projects for different use
|
|
cases. Far too much time is spent circling back to the "What is OpenStack" -
|
|
which I foresee getting even more complex as the OpenStack Foundation grows
|
|
beyond the OpenStack Project, and having a solid, stable answer to what we are
|
|
is going to be vital.
|
|
|
|
I would like to thank you for taking the time to read my thoughts - and ask
|
|
you to consider me for your vote. If elected I will strive to be vocal for the
|
|
community that I have gotten so much from. I want to give some more back to
|
|
them ensure that the OpenStack Project continues to be the go to software for
|
|
Infrastructure as a Service.
|
|
|
|
Thanks again,
|
|
|
|
- Graham
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 - http://stackalytics.com/?release=all&metric=commits&user_id=grahamhayes
|
|
2 - https://www.openstack.org/community/members/profile/12766/graham-hayes
|
|
3 - https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/governance+(commentby:%22Graham+Hayes+%253Cgr%2540ham.ie%253E%22+OR+reviewedby:%22Graham+Hayes+%253Cgr%2540ham.ie%253E%22++OR+owner:%22Graham+Hayes+%253Cgr%2540ham.ie%253E%22)
|
|
4 - http://graham.hayes.ie/posts/dublin-ptg-summary/#board-of-directors-meeting
|
|
5 - http://graham.hayes.ie/posts/sydney-openstack-summit/#sunday-board-joint-leadership-meeting
|
|
6 - https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20170404-vision-2019.html |