Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

When OPNFV launched, the TSC was populated with representatives of the Platinum members. The consensus was that the TSC composition would be revisited after OPNFV is established.  In Q4'2016, we added 5 "committers-at-large" TSC members to Platinum TSC representatives.  

For background information about the OPNFV bylaws, OPNFV TSC charter and what other organizations are doing, see this presentation: TSC composition background and notes from OPNFV Danube Hackfest 

The purpose of this page is to facilitate the discussion of TSC role and composition.

What should the TSC do?

Before deciding who should be in the TSC, it is worth discussing what the TSC should do.  The following tasks have been mentioned (please also read Section 5 of the TSC Charter).

 

  • Review existing projects, check if all projects are relevant, what projects are missing

  • Give technical feedback on different topics

  • Give feedback on the technical direction of the OPNFV

  • Have like-minded people for technical discussions and fixing technical problems

  • Be a technical decision body

  • Serve as a technical interface for the End User Advisory Group

Points for purely elected TSC

  • Can get a smaller and more active TSC which would helps reach quorum in meetings
  • This would be a move towards a merit (or contribution) based TSC
  • Example: Limit the size of the TSC to 12 members with 50% of the TSC members elected from PTLs and the other 50% elected from committers (there would be a maximum of 2 TSC members from each company)


Point for keeping current TSC

  • Difficult to define who should vote for the TSC, since the projects are so different (e.g. are committers the right constituents?)
  • OPNFV is end-user focused rather than developer oriented, so if project committers elect the TSC, the voice of the end users could be lost
  • Platinum members may feel that they are losing one of the benefits of being a Platinum member.  

Other alternatives

  • A hybrid of two approaches above where Platinum members would have a certain number of TSC seats
  • Example: Limit the size of the TSC to 15 members with 10 members elected from Platinum members and the remaining 5 elected from committers (there would be a maximum of 2 TSC members from each company).  


Topics during the OPNFV Summit

  • Are committers the right people to elect the TSC?
  • Can we go to 100 per cent merit based TSC today?
    • Responsibilities of the TSC (see section 5 of the TSC Charter)

"Subject to such policies as may be set by the Board, the TSC is responsible for simultaneous release dates, release quality standards, technical best practices (including the establishment and maintenance of a Development Process), monitoring technical progress, mediating technical conflicts between Committers and Project Leads, and organizing inter-project collaboration. The TSC will define OPNFV’s release vehicles and serve as OPNFV’s primary technical liaison body with other consortiums and groups."

 

 

  • No labels

3 Comments

  1. Limiting the size of the TSC would be beneficial in my opinion. 22 is a big number, it's impossible that all members actively engage in the conversation. 15 would make more sense.

    I like the hybrid approach, it's a way to involve different roles in the TSC (developers, end users, etc. ). There's still the open question: who's allowed to vote?

    Another point is how to ensure diversity inside the TSC. We could do that by making sure that we have diversity in the candidates for the TSC seats. If candidates are not so diverse then we should approach people directly to include genders, roles, geographies, etc that are missing.

  2. I lean towards a hybrid approach as well as a smooth migration path between the current situation and a purely PTLs/committers TSC.

    Platinum members having a certain number of TSC seats and the remaining elected from PTLs/committers with a limited total number of TSC members from each company.  

  3. Notes from the discussion:

    • TSC members nominate themselves, must prove to be "active contributor"
    • Committers vote 
    • Two year terms
    • 15 members?
    • Staggered system

    Still, no more than two members from the same company can be elected (more than two can be nominated)

    Same in presentation format: