OpenStack Elections repository
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.

Armando_Migliaccio.txt 5.1KB

123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384
  1. I would like to propose my candidacy for the Neutron PTL.
  2. If you are reading this and you know me, then you probably know what I
  3. have been up to up until now, what I have done for the project, and what
  4. I may continue to do. If you do not know me, and you are still interested
  5. in reading, then I will try not bore you.
  6. As member of this project, I have been involved with it since the early
  7. days, and I have served as core developer since Havana. If you are wondering
  8. whether I am partially to blame for the issues that affect Neutron, well you
  9. may have a point, but keep reading...
  10. I believe that Neutron itself is a unique project and as such has unique
  11. challenges. We have grown tremendously mostly propelled by a highly opinionated
  12. vendor perspective. This has caused us some problems and we set foot a cycle
  13. or so ago to fix these, but at the same time stay true to the nature of our
  14. mission: define logical abstractions, and related implementations to
  15. provide on-demand, cloud oriented networking services.
  16. As any other project in OpenStack, we are software and we mostly implement
  17. 'stuff' in software, and because of that we are prone to all the issues that
  18. a software project may have. To this aim, going forward I would like us to
  19. improve the following:
  20. * Stability is the priority: new features are important, but complete and well
  21. tested existing features are more important; we gotta figure out a way to
  22. bring the number of bugs down to a manageable number, just like nations
  23. are asked to keep their sovereign debt below a certain healthy threshold.
  24. * Narrow the focus: now that the Neutron 'stadium' is here with us, external
  25. plugins and drivers can integrate with Neutron in a losely manner, giving the
  26. core the opportunity to be more razor focus at getting better at what we do:
  27. logical abstractions and pluggability.
  28. * Consistency is paramount: having grown the review team drastically over the
  29. past cycle, it is easy to skew quality in one area over an other. We need to
  30. start defining common development and reviewer practices so that, even though
  31. we deal are made of many sub-projects and modules, we operate, feel and look
  32. like one...just like OpenStack :)
  33. * Define long term strategy: we need to have an idea where Neutron starts and
  34. where Neutron ends. At some point, this project will reach enough maturity
  35. where we feel like we are 'done' and that's okay. Some of us will move on to
  36. the next big thing.
  37. * Keep developers and reviewers _aware_: we all have to work collectively towards
  38. a common set of goals, defined by the release cycle. We will have to learn to
  39. push back on _random_ forces that keep distracting us.
  40. * I would like to promote a 'you merge it, you own it' type of mentality: even
  41. though we are pretty good at it already, we need a better balance between
  42. reviews and contributions. If you bless a patch, you got to be prepared to
  43. dive into the issues that it may potentially causes. If you bless a patch, you
  44. got to be prepared to improve the code around it, and so on. You will be a
  45. better reviewer if you learn to live with the pain of your mistakes. This
  46. is he only way to establish a virtuous cycle where quality improves time
  47. over time.
  48. And last but not least:
  49. * Improve the relationships with other projects: Nova and QA primarily. We
  50. should allocate enough bandwidth to address integration issues with Nova and
  51. the other emerging projects, so that we stay plugged with them. QA is also
  52. paramount so that no-one is gonna hate us because we send the gate belly up.
  53. As for nova-network, I must admit I am highly skeptical by now: if our
  54. community were a commercial enterprise trying to solve that problem we would
  55. have ran out of money long time ago.
  56. We tried time and time again to crack this nut open, and even though we made
  57. progress in a number of areas, we haven't really budged where some people
  58. felt it mattered. We need to recognize that the problem is not just technical
  59. ...it is social; no-one, starting from the developers and the employers behind
  60. them, seems to be genuinely concerned with the need of making nova-network a
  61. thing of the past. They have other priorities, they are chasing new customers,
  62. they want to disrupt Amazon. None of this nova-network deprecation drama fits
  63. with their agendas and furthermore, even if we found non-corporate sponsored
  64. developers willing to work on it, let's face it migration is a problem that
  65. is really not that interesting to solve. So where do we go from here?
  66. I do not have a clear answer yet. However, I think we all agree that the
  67. Neutron team wants to make Neutron a better product, more aligned with the
  68. needs of our users, but we must recognized that _better_ does not mean *like*
  69. nova-network, because the two products are not the same and they never will be.
  70. Ok, now that you read this, you are ready to know whether you may want to
  71. vote for me. Having said that, if you think that I am doing a fine job as core
  72. reviewer, you trust my technical in-depth contribution, and you're worried
  73. that my PTL duties may take that away from you...exercise your vote right!
  74. Thanks for reading and forgive the typos!
  75. Armando Migliaccio (aka armax)