non-coding sub-projects
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Infrastructure team began discussing seeking formal recognition as a sub-project of oVirt. However, the current methodology is clearly focused on code: http://www.ovirt.org/governance/adding-a-subproject/ As such, I'm not even sure we know exactly what the Infra team is asking for! At a minimum, I think the goal is to: * Get 3+ maintainers in the project, then * Get recognition as a formal project, and * Maintainers join the Board to proactively drive infrastructure for the entire project. What think you all? - - Karsten - -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Analyst - Community Growth http://TheOpenSourceWay.org .^\ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v. gpg: AD0E0C41 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iD8DBQFP+2EK2ZIOBq0ODEERApEAAKCaLNWnwluKuLZ9YfqLx23Bo03+5ACeIKay 7uAqsUbsQg4xvL/Kji1bNb0= =082m -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 07/10/2012 01:54 AM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
The Infrastructure team began discussing seeking formal recognition as a sub-project of oVirt.
However, the current methodology is clearly focused on code:
http://www.ovirt.org/governance/adding-a-subproject/
As such, I'm not even sure we know exactly what the Infra team is asking for! At a minimum, I think the goal is to:
* Get 3+ maintainers in the project, then * Get recognition as a formal project, and * Maintainers join the Board to proactively drive infrastructure for the entire project.
there is no connection between being a maintainer in a sub project and joining the board. we already have the non coding documentation project by stephen gordon, though missing from that wiki i guess as an oversight
What think you all?
- - Karsten - -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Analyst - Community Growth http://TheOpenSourceWay.org .^\ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v. gpg: AD0E0C41
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iD8DBQFP+2EK2ZIOBq0ODEERApEAAKCaLNWnwluKuLZ9YfqLx23Bo03+5ACeIKay 7uAqsUbsQg4xvL/Kji1bNb0= =082m -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Board mailing list Board@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
Hi Itamar, On 07/10/2012 08:15 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
we already have the non coding documentation project by stephen gordon, though missing from that wiki i guess as an oversight
Funny you should bring this up - I just recently found the docs project Git repository - and was very surprised that it isn't listed at http://www.ovirt.org/project/subprojects/ In fact, the ovirt-docs Git repository is not mentioned at all on www.ovirt.org, as far as I can see. I would really like to see ovirt-docs mentioned on the projects page, as it is (in spite of being non-code) managed in the same way as the code projects. What do you think? Incidentally, I updated the Documentation page in the wiki yesterday to make it clearer that it is possible to get the docs without having an account on Gerrit: http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Documentation I'm still figuring out how to generate XHTML docs with Publican so that I can read them, since that is not documented (at least not on ovirt.org/wiki), but one step at a time :) Thanks, Dave. -- Dave Neary Community Action and Impact Open Source and Standards Team, Red Hat Phone: +33 9 50 71 55 62
On 07/10/2012 12:36 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi Itamar,
On 07/10/2012 08:15 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
we already have the non coding documentation project by stephen gordon, though missing from that wiki i guess as an oversight
Funny you should bring this up - I just recently found the docs project Git repository - and was very surprised that it isn't listed at http://www.ovirt.org/project/subprojects/
In fact, the ovirt-docs Git repository is not mentioned at all on www.ovirt.org, as far as I can see. I would really like to see ovirt-docs mentioned on the projects page, as it is (in spite of being non-code) managed in the same way as the code projects.
What do you think?
I have no problem with non code projects appearing there.
Incidentally, I updated the Documentation page in the wiki yesterday to make it clearer that it is possible to get the docs without having an account on Gerrit: http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Documentation
I'm still figuring out how to generate XHTML docs with Publican so that I can read them, since that is not documented (at least not on ovirt.org/wiki), but one step at a time :)
Thanks, Dave.
On 07/10/2012 06:14 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 07/10/2012 12:36 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi Itamar,
On 07/10/2012 08:15 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
we already have the non coding documentation project by stephen gordon, though missing from that wiki i guess as an oversight
Funny you should bring this up - I just recently found the docs project Git repository - and was very surprised that it isn't listed at http://www.ovirt.org/project/subprojects/
In fact, the ovirt-docs Git repository is not mentioned at all on www.ovirt.org, as far as I can see. I would really like to see ovirt-docs mentioned on the projects page, as it is (in spite of being non-code) managed in the same way as the code projects.
What do you think?
I have no problem with non code projects appearing there.
+1 Carl.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 07/10/2012 02:36 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
Hi Itamar,
On 07/10/2012 08:15 AM, Itamar Heim wrote:
we already have the non coding documentation project by stephen gordon, though missing from that wiki i guess as an oversight
Funny you should bring this up - I just recently found the docs project Git repository - and was very surprised that it isn't listed at http://www.ovirt.org/project/subprojects/
In fact, the ovirt-docs Git repository is not mentioned at all on www.ovirt.org, as far as I can see. I would really like to see ovirt-docs mentioned on the projects page, as it is (in spite of being non-code) managed in the same way as the code projects.
What do you think?
I personally think it's a legitimate project, but I don't know the details of the Board voting on it, etc.
Incidentally, I updated the Documentation page in the wiki yesterday to make it clearer that it is possible to get the docs without having an account on Gerrit: http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Documentation
I'm still figuring out how to generate XHTML docs with Publican so that I can read them, since that is not documented (at least not on ovirt.org/wiki), but one step at a time :)
If you can't find help on #publican on Freenode, folks in #fedora-docs are very helpful. - - Karsten - -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Analyst - Community Growth http://TheOpenSourceWay.org .^\ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iD8DBQFP/IY22ZIOBq0ODEERAkLwAJ4tKcijM6d5fkPlxBYSmPN00jObcgCgnlxB zDrCA6WmV2ys1RMiPj6Rz/M= =kO8H -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 07/09/2012 11:15 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
there is no connection between being a maintainer in a sub project and joining the board.
I was forgetting that the project leads who were made part of the initial Board was not the norm: "A few domain leaders from projects. Not all projects have board representation so that community members can work to fill some of these seats related to projects. Not every project has to be on the board. They do however need to participate in the coordination mail lists." http://www.ovirt.org/governance/board/ However, there is a meaningful connection. Becoming a maintainer is a sign of individual merit, and a collection of such merit is a prerequisite to being voted on to the Board. Similarly, a project is likely to appreciate having one or more maintainers who are Board members. As a hard development project, infrastructure is more strategic to us than to other open source projects. So in Infrastructure's case, there is value in having one or more maintainers able to get on to the Board so they are helping influence the project direction.
we already have the non coding documentation project by stephen gordon, though missing from that wiki i guess as an oversight
I missed the discussion around adding that as a project, sorry. What was the decision criteria? Is the process in a document somewhere? I'd like to update the http://www.ovirt.org/governance/adding-a-subproject/ page. - - karsten - -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Analyst - Community Growth http://TheOpenSourceWay.org .^\ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iD8DBQFP/IEi2ZIOBq0ODEERAq8FAKDCwzYjYMe4Hotqy/UB1B8Kzz8S0gCgpN56 +QbhEPZXX0knz6LXZG4EEHQ= =Tqod -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On 07/10/2012 02:23 PM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 07/09/2012 11:15 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
there is no connection between being a maintainer in a sub project and joining the board.
I was forgetting that the project leads who were made part of the initial Board was not the norm:
"A few domain leaders from projects. Not all projects have board representation so that community members can work to fill some of these seats related to projects. Not every project has to be on the board. They do however need to participate in the coordination mail lists."
http://www.ovirt.org/governance/board/
However, there is a meaningful connection. Becoming a maintainer is a sign of individual merit, and a collection of such merit is a prerequisite to being voted on to the Board.
Similarly, a project is likely to appreciate having one or more maintainers who are Board members.
So far, I think the board really hasn't done that much, no? I think there's been very few votes and the votes probably weren't all that controversial. I think erring on the side of having greater participation will increase the likelihood that the board actually has debates and that interesting topics are brought forward. I'm very much in favor of bringing in as many people as possible within reason. Regards, Anthony Liguori As a hard development project,
infrastructure is more strategic to us than to other open source projects. So in Infrastructure's case, there is value in having one or more maintainers able to get on to the Board so they are helping influence the project direction.
we already have the non coding documentation project by stephen gordon, though missing from that wiki i guess as an oversight
I missed the discussion around adding that as a project, sorry. What was the decision criteria? Is the process in a document somewhere? I'd like to update the http://www.ovirt.org/governance/adding-a-subproject/ page.
- - karsten - -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Analyst - Community Growth http://TheOpenSourceWay.org .^\ http://community.redhat.com @quaid (identi.ca/twitter/IRC) \v' gpg: AD0E0C41
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iD8DBQFP/IEi2ZIOBq0ODEERAq8FAKDCwzYjYMe4Hotqy/UB1B8Kzz8S0gCgpN56 +QbhEPZXX0knz6LXZG4EEHQ= =Tqod -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Board mailing list Board@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/board
On 07/10/2012 03:39 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 07/10/2012 02:23 PM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 07/09/2012 11:15 PM, Itamar Heim wrote:
there is no connection between being a maintainer in a sub project and joining the board.
I was forgetting that the project leads who were made part of the initial Board was not the norm:
"A few domain leaders from projects. Not all projects have board representation so that community members can work to fill some of these seats related to projects. Not every project has to be on the board. They do however need to participate in the coordination mail lists."
http://www.ovirt.org/governance/board/
However, there is a meaningful connection. Becoming a maintainer is a sign of individual merit, and a collection of such merit is a prerequisite to being voted on to the Board.
Similarly, a project is likely to appreciate having one or more maintainers who are Board members.
So far, I think the board really hasn't done that much, no? I think there's been very few votes and the votes probably weren't all that controversial.
I think erring on the side of having greater participation will increase the likelihood that the board actually has debates and that interesting topics are brought forward.
I'm very much in favor of bringing in as many people as possible within reason.
Also, it is fine to say that we will become stricter as the project matures. Carl.
participants (5)
-
Anthony Liguori -
Carl Trieloff -
Dave Neary -
Itamar Heim -
Karsten 'quaid' Wade