cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Animesh Chaturvedi <animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: CloudStack Quality Process
Date Fri, 05 Dec 2014 23:36:44 GMT


> having said so, I propose to set a date for our first (irc/goto) meeting;
> wednesday 10 december 16:00 UTC?
[Animesh]  Can we push it out by 1 hour to 17:00 UTC, the current time falls out on my time
for dropping kids to school. If it does not work for others I can join @14:00 UTC (6:00 AM
PST)

> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Will Stevens <wstevens@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
> > I am speaking as a committer who has limited insight into the
> > 'correct' way to do this via Apache (so be gentle).  :)
> >
> > I like the idea of a wiki page to help get everyone on the same page
> > and to track the consensus as we move forward...
> >
> > I also agree that it is hard to come to a consensus on the list
> > because it is really hard to have a constructive conversation on here
> > in a timely manner where the different voices can be heard.
> >
> > I think it would be interesting to schedule sessions/meetings on the
> > list so any interested party can join.  These sessions/meetings would
> > happen in a format like IRC where the transcript of the session can be
> > later posted to the list as well as a summary of the transcript so it
> > can be reviewed by any member who could not make the meeting.  This
> > way we keep all of the actual conversation in the list, but we also
> > make it easier to actually have a 'conversation' at the same time.  It
> > is hard to beat real time when working through this sort of stuff.
> >
> > Does this make sense to others?  Thoughts?
> >
> > Will
> >
> >
> > *Will STEVENS*
> > Lead Developer
> >
> > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts
> > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw
> > @CloudOps_
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi <
> > animesh.chaturvedi@citrix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Wearing my PMC hat and with past experience on these discussions we
> >> have not made much progress on mailing list despite agreeing on the
> >> goals and have locked horns. One possibility after reading Chip's
> >> email and concerns I see is that, we create a wiki outlining the
> >> problem space, possible
> >> solution(s) and their specific pros and cons and have people collaborate.
> >> Once a general consensus is there and wiki is stable we can bring it
> >> back to the mailing list for final approval. This is open as well as
> >> requires participant a higher degree of commitment to collaborate and
> >> will be more structured.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Animesh
> >>
> >> > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Chip Childers
> >> > <chipchilders@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > Steve,
> >> > >
> >> > > (Speaking with my PMC hat on, but not as someone that has the
> >> > > time to help with this process)
> >> > >
> >> > > I love the idea of moving forward with resolving some of the
> >> > > quality process / tooling / etc... challenges that we face as a
> >> > > project and community. I also love the idea that companies
> >> > > getting commercial value from this project are talking (as
> >> > > companies) about how to best support the project through either
> >> > > directing their employees to work on this problem, allowing those
> >> > > interested the time to do so, and / or offering (as Citrix did)
> >> > > required hardware/software resources to make improvements for the
> >> > > common good.  Importantly, I like that the companies involved are
> >> > > mutually agreeing that this is for the common good.
> >> > >
> >> > > That said, I have a concern about the outline below, specifically
> >> > > in how the definition of approach and eventual execution are handled.
> >> > > The proposal of taking this off-list until there is a "proposal
> >> > > to
> >> ratify"
> >> > > is what I'd like to see changed. I would fully expect that a
> >> > > fleshed out proposal hitting the list would be met with more
> >> > > discussion than you would like (and perhaps even met with frustration).
> >> > >
> >> > > What has worked well for us in the past, where there is a need to
> >> > > have those interested in "doing work" to be able to focus on that
> >> > > work, has been to start with a call for interested parties (as
> >> > > you did). Then, using a combination of threads on this list and
> >> > > "live" meetings, make progress on defining the requirements and
> approach incrementally.
> >> > > Execution of any work should similarly be open and shared on this
list.
> >> > > Throughout that process, allowing comments and openings for
> >> > > participants are critical.
> >> > >
> >> > > One of the things we learned about using "live" meetings to speed
> >> > > up the consensus process in the past is to make sure that while
> >> > > they are fantastic at allowing the participants to understand
> >> > > each other, it's critical to remember that (1) there are no
> >> > > project decisions made outside of the mailing lists and (2) that
> >> > > it's important to have minutes or notes from those live meetings
> >> > > shared with the community as
> >> a
> >> > whole.
> >> > >
> >> > > Now a very real concern that some of us have is getting bogged
> >> > > down in arguments based on opinion, especially the "drive by"
> >> > > opinions. This issue (plus challenges with people violently
> >> > > agreeing with each other, yet talking past each other), is what I
> >> > > believe has held up meaningful progress. To deal with this, I
> >> > > suggest we all remember that projects at the ASF are about
> >> > > supporting those that "DO", while giving opportunity for
> >> > > participation and comment from those that might not currently be
> >> > > "DOING". But those that are doing the work, and collaborating to
> >> > > reach a shared goal, shouldn't let a lack of 100% consensus on every
> aspect hold back progress.
> >> > >
> >> > > As someone who will not be "doing" anything for this effort, but
> >> > > has an interest in maintaining this community's health and seeing
> >> > > it continue to succeed, I hope my suggestions and comments are helpful.
> >> > >
> >> > > -chip
> >> > >
> >> > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 07:12:27PM +0000, Steve Wilson wrote:
> >> > >> Hi Everyone,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> It was great to get to see a number of you at the recent CCC in
> >> Budapest.
> >> > While I was there, I got to meet face to face with individuals
> >> > working
> >> for several
> >> > companies that have a real stake in the commercial success of the
> >> CloudStack
> >> > project.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> After joining Citrix (and becoming involved in CloudStack) about
> >> > >> a
> >> year ago,
> >> > I’ve come to believe that we need to do more to mature our quality
> >> practices
> >> > around this codebase.  We all like to say #cloudstackworks (and
> >> > it’s
> >> true), but
> >> > this is a massive codebase that’s used in the most demanding
> >> situations.  We
> >> > have large telecommunications companies and enterprises who are
> >> > betting
> >> their
> >> > businesses on this software.  It has to be great!
> >> > >>
> >> > >> There has been quite a bit of discussion on the mailing list in
> >> recent months
> >> > about how we improve in this area.  There is plenty of passion, but
> >> > we
> >> haven’t
> >> > made enough concrete progress as a community.  In my discussions
> >> > with key contributors as CCC, there was general agreement that the
> >> > DEV list isn’t
> >> a good
> >> > forum for hashing out these kinds of things.  Email is too
> >> > low-bandwidth
> >> and too
> >> > impersonal.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> At CCC, I discussed with several people the idea that we
> >> > >> commission a
> >> small
> >> > sub team to go hash out a proposal for how we handle the following
> >> > topics within the ACS community (which can then be brought back to
> >> > the larger community for ratification):
> >> > >>
> >> > >>   *   Continuous integration and test automation
> >> > >>   *   Gating of commits
> >> > >>   *   Overall commit workflow
> >> > >>
> >> > >> We are looking for volunteers to commit to being part of this
team.
> >> This
> >> > would imply a serious commitment.  We don’t want hangers on or
> observers.
> >> > This will entail real work and late night meetings.  We’re looking
> >> > for
> >> people who
> >> > are serious contributors to the codebase.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> From Citrix, David Nalley and Animesh Chaturvedi have booth told
> >> > >> me
> >> they’re
> >> > willing to commit to this project.  They’ve both managed ACS
> >> > releases
> >> and have
> >> > a really good view into the current process — and I know both are
> >> passionate
> >> > about improving our process.  From my CCC discussions, I believe
> >> > there
> >> are
> >> > individuals from Schuberg Philis, Shape Blue and Cloud Ops who are
> >> willing to
> >> > commit to this process.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> If you are willing to be part of this team to drive forward our
> >> community,
> >> > please reply here.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Thanks,
> >> > >>
> >> > >> -Steve
> >> > >>
> >> > >> Steve Wilson
> >> > >> VP & Product Unit Manager
> >> > >> Cloud Software
> >> > >> Citrix
> >> > >> @virtualsteve
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Daan
> >>
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Daan
Mime
View raw message