[CentOS-devel] NFV SIG - update

Thomas F Herbert therbert at redhat.com
Tue May 30 18:15:26 UTC 2017


KB, Karsten,

Interest in NFV SIG has been heating up lately.

I have been acting chair of NFV Sig but there are some lose ends.

1. I am not sure if I have received formal approval as chair. I have 
received endorsements from current members including Dfarrel and DNeary, 
the acting chair and active contributor/committor at the time. I 
understand that this requires board approval. If so, can that this item 
be placed on the agenda for the next board meeting?

2. I have an account on wiki.centos.org but don't have permissions to 
edit the NFV SIG wiki page, 
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/NFV Do I need a bugz for this?

3. Do additional package builders/members in the NFV SIG require board 
approval in addition to SIG chair approval? I have received informally 
two NFV SIG member requests. I have asked requestors to file bugz.

Thanks,

--Tom


On 10/20/2016 11:01 AM, Daniel Farrell wrote:
> As an NFV SIG committer and the packager for the only
> active project in the SIG (OpenDaylight), just wanted
> to throw in my +1.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Daniel Farrell
> Software Engineer, Red Hat SDN Team
> https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/user:dfarrell07
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Karsten,
>>
>> Thanks for the detail info about governance and the process in Centos.
>>
>> More comments in line below:
>>
>> --Tom
>>
>> On 09/26/2016 08:51 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
>>>
>>> On 09/26/2016 03:15 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> There has been a recent resurgence of interest in the NFV SIG, and in
>>>> the interest of keeping the momentum going, I would like to step aside
>>>> as SIG char, and recommend that Tom Herbert take over. Tom has taken on
>>>> the packaging and building of VPP and DPDK-accelerated OVS for OPNFV,
>>>> and has been active in the SIG in recent weeks, and I think he will help
>>>> add the structure that has been sorely lacking from me in recent months.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what the process is for replacing a SIG chair - can someone
>>>> let us know, please?
>>>>
>>> I'll gladly be the policy wonk with some thoughts. ;-)
>>>
>>> Although I helped write it, it's been a while so I went to review SIG
>>> governance:
>>>
>>> https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/
>>>
>>> Thanks to the Easter eggs in there from our past selves, here's my
>>> summary of the situations & steps:
>>>
>>> tl;dnr
>>> ======
>>>
>>> You need to talk with me, your Board mentor, and we need to get approval
>>> from the Board. A video face-to-face with you and Tom is also in order.
>>> Let's go ahead and thrash out the details in this thread, I'm expecting
>>> some input from others, and we'll just drive it to resolution.
>>>
>>> SIG members, RDO folks, KB, Jim, -- I'm looking at you for input on
>>> leadership changes and mission, toward helping the NFV SIG get a clear
>>> path forward. I concur I'm seeing the resurgence of energy and want to
>>> help it/get out of its way.
>>>
>>> wonky details
>>> =============
>>>
>>> A. With a SIG in the early stages, a move to replace leadership of the
>>> SIG needs to managed hand-in-hand with your SIG mentor from the CentOS
>>> Board. Oh, hey, appears that's me![0]
>>>
>>> B. That person's recommendation to the overall Board is going to carry a
>>> lot of weight, so make that person comfortable with the process and
>>> decision.[1] Let's talk here on list & maybe some directly, as needed,
>>> to work that out so we can get it to a Board vote in a reasonable time.
>>>
>>> C. A video conference with the Board and the current & proposed SIG
>>> chairs would be a good idea. Public or private is a different question.[2]
>> OK, I will set up video con via BJN with you and Dave and anyone else
>> that indicates interest.
>>> D. Ultimately, at this early SIG maturity level ("Sandbox"), all new SIG
>>> members require Board approval. In practice we've been doing super-soft
>>> consensus, where we trust the Board mentor to oversee the project and
>>> member approvals without requiring an explicit +1.[3]
>>>
>>> My last thought is to wonder if you and/or Tom Herbert are able to come
>>> to the CentOS Interlock on 9/10 of November in Paris? It might be a good
>>> chance to close a hand-off of the ecosystem relationships.
>>>
>>> https://wiki.centos.org/Events/Interlock2016
>> I would love to but I am booked for OVSCON on the 7th 8th and the
>> ovs/dpdk design summit on the 10th.
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> - Karsten, who was keeping notes anyway ...
>>>
>>> Below quotes are from https://www.centos.org/about/governance/sigs/ :
>>>
>>> [0] https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/NFV
>>>
>>> [1] Conduct the business of the SIG following accepted open source
>>> practices around meritocracy and consensus decision making.
>>>
>>> [2] All new committers, developers, SIG core team members, etc. must be
>>> approved by the Board.
>>>
>>> [3] In both the Sandbox and Early SIGs, the role of the Board is
>>> primarily to facilitate the movement of those SIGs towards the Mature
>>> level; it serves as an initial gateway with the goal of getting out of
>>> the way of the SIGs.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Dave.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CentOS-devel mailing list
>>> CentOS-devel at centos.org
>>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>>>
>> --
>> *Thomas F Herbert*
>> SDN Group
>> Office of Technology
>> *Red Hat*
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS-devel mailing list
>> CentOS-devel at centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel at centos.org
> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel

-- 
*Thomas F Herbert*
Fast Data Planes
Office of Technology
*Red Hat*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20170530/959730e9/attachment.html>


More information about the CentOS-devel mailing list