As discussed in PTG, we will try the DPL model first for
the leaderless projects or if PTL assignment is needed in between
of the cycle.
- https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tc-zed-ptg#L109
Change-Id: Ie65553720247b585be94d53811a2ade20353f9cc
We should not allow changes to a project unless someone from the project
(e.g. the PTL or their delegate) agrees to the change.
Change-Id: I9e52035da299d7ae3e55e4636d0a1c66ca3c2e36
Signed-off-by: Graham Hayes <gr@ham.ie>
We have a huge timeout right now for the addition of new projects to a
team which is just slowing things down for usually no reason. This aims
at speeding up the process by replacing the current one-week waiting
period with a need for only two roll-call +1 votes.
We can always revert additions if they don't make sense.
Change-Id: I4a88916f81699a343812c8e01f7419d33cab1ac3
Community goal proposals are intended to be an iterative process
according to the goal process documentation [1]. Goals should be
committed to the goals/proposed/ directory and then the committed goals
should later, as a separate action, be evaluated and the ones selected
as cycle goals should be moved to goals/selected/.
This change clarifies the wording in the goals process and house rules
to indicate that normal voting criteria should hold for proposed goals,
and full formal-vote criteria should hold for the selection of goals.
Presently formal-vote is used for all.
By loosening the criteria for voting it is hoped that the goals section
will be more like the ideas repository, a less constrained forum for
ideas to be proposed, debated, and refined. Goals would still need at
least two TC members to merge as proposed, so there would still be
validation of the goals. I believe this is the model that the goals
process refinement was hoping for.
Without this change, the formal-vote criteria for proposed goals voids
the iterative nature of goal development specified in the goal process
document. Functionally it means that TC members hold off on voting
until goal selection. This means that goals are not merged to the
goals/proposed/ directory, and there is no reason for it directory to
exist. I believe this is a suboptimal result.
for more background, see the discussion on #openstack-tc on 28 April
2020 [2].
[1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/index.html#process-details
[2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-tc/%23openstack-tc.2020-04-28.log.html#t2020-04-28T16:44:49
Change-Id: Ifa077520468e2caf218e5265f1ce4432ac3848ee
At the PTG we discussed how the chair should handle situations where
there are multiple incompatible patches that each have, on paper,
sufficient votes to be merged. Discussion turned to broader principles
of how we want to operate by consensus, without putting the chair in a
position where they never know if they are authorised to merge a patch
or not. This change to the house rules captures the outcome of that
discussion.
Change-Id: I6187a3ca4ad0438890a8aa88f5228876afd76d43
There is no reason to treat election results as requiring a formal
vote, so document them as a special case under house rules, along with
the reasoning. Update the review status tool to reflect this change.
Change-Id: If907b2f4627da289f76e3a8b92d49f08a116535d
Signed-off-by: Doug Hellmann <doug@doughellmann.com>
As elected representitves, we should trust in the TC members to do what is best
for the OpenStack project. For the fast tracked changes, we should not require
the chair of the TC to approve typos, or reverts, and instead trust the TC
to only use their +W where it is appropriate.
This would cause a change to the gerrit ACLs to add +W to members
of the "tech-committee" group on review.opendev.org.
Change-Id: I010318bf872034fe6a550f1d7d1050e7e95bc76e
Signed-off-by: Graham Hayes <gr@ham.ie>
There are probably more details to include here, but these are the two
items that stand out as significant right now.
Change-Id: Ic474a5197a5efc226722a66ab246c64c85ca5551
Signed-off-by: Doug Hellmann <doug@doughellmann.com>
We have for a while now applied approval rules for "documentation"
updates that do not change policy. Document that rule.
Change-Id: Ia216f90ff1b2dd115af2f15fd50f914932fc2ae7
Signed-off-by: Doug Hellmann <doug@doughellmann.com>
Add the gerrit topic tag to use when applying each house rule to a patch.
Change-Id: Ia8c2ae26fc7e60f7bc3f03fb4898cf91de36773d
Signed-off-by: Doug Hellmann <doug@doughellmann.com>
The release-management metadata for a project is managed by the release
team. This change applies the same delegation rules that we use for the
delegated tags that the stable and VMT teams use.
Change-Id: Ib47f9c569376ef13267342a47600b53007213fb9
Signed-off-by: Doug Hellmann <doug@doughellmann.com>
We've been dealing with how to make appointed PTLs official and
documented in a rather ad hoc fashion: something different each
cycle.
This change provides a house rule which puts the responsibility
and the documentation in the combined hands of the appointed PTL
and the TC that appointed them and not election handling (where
it doesn't make sense since no election happened).
Change-Id: Idf78e00c59d10528a2b4950f8baa93c6731973ea
Since the TC stopped having weekly meetings, it's no longer appropriate
to hold off discussion on things until the next meeting except in
extreme circumstances that merit scheduling a meeting. This patch
updates the house rules to reflect the new agreement on asynchronous
debating[1].
[1] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20170425-drop-tc-weekly-meetings.html#debating
Change-Id: I2cce285d7d7df338904b6aa8b71bd9ab51ca5081
A while ago it was decided[0] that motions, before being
merged/approved, should be discussed and voted on during the Technical
Committee meetings. This worked well back in the days but it's not
necessary anymore. This was carried over even though we now have an
asynchronous voting system and it was never properly documented or
re-evaluated.
This patch documents how formal-vote patches are voted on and eventually
approved.
[0] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-August/013339.html
Change-Id: Ie84bacb9038d82bdfb518724a8e6fb726f5a0316
When we cleaned up the release tags we missed a reference to one in the
static documentation.
Change-Id: Ie95f5e513b69f1168913dce8238ae3b4e4705ed7
Signed-off-by: Doug Hellmann <doug@doughellmann.com>
Ghanshyam Mann