Open Stack

Rob_Hirschfeld at Dell.com wrote:
>    * Review DefCore Process Chart (attached) – time limited.
> 
>    * Review Designated Sections Strawman
> from https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreLighthouse.5   

The call yesterday was a bit busy, but I think we actually clarified
something with respect to the "technical community input on designated
sections" stage.

There are two types of proposals in the Designated Sections strawman.
Some projects have /some/ designated sections, while some others don't
have *any* designated section. In the latter case, at the heart of that
decision is the fact that a lot of companies in the OpenStack ecosystem
ship products that do not include the project at all, and Defcore would
still like to allow those companies to use the "Powered by OpenStack"
trademark license program. I totally respect those decisions: it's a
hard call to make and it's the board prerogative and duty to make it.

But as far as technical feedback is concerned, it's difficult to ask
Swift contributors if they agree that none of the code they wrote is
necessary to call your product "powered by OpenStack". Of course they
won't agree: it's actually not a judgment of technical value, it's just
a trademark policy choice. By extension, it's difficult to ask the
Technical Committee, the body representing all those contributors, to
agree that part of the code they produce is not necessary or less
important. That body can only give one answer, and will continue to do so.

Now, that doesn't mean you can't get any technical input on the
Designated sections strawman, but quite the opposite: it just has to be
organized differently. There is still a lot of value in technical input
to precisely define designated sections lines in the case a project has
/some/ designated sections. For example for Glance, does it make
technically sense to consider the WSGI framework as replaceable or not.

So here would be my suggested way forward: for all the projects that
have "some" designated sections (Nova, Glance, Cinder), organize a
specific call/meeting calling all interested members of our technical
community (individual TC members, project PTL, any contributor
interested) to join and give feedback on the proposed split between
designated and non-designated code in their project. That could be a
30-min-per-project thing in a 90-min time span, or 3 separate meetings.

FWIW, personally, I think the proposed split on Nova, Glance and Cinder
makes technical sense.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)