Open Stack

Thanks for the update. I'd like to address one paragraph in particular from your attached PDF:

"DefCore believes that Swift has required capabilities; however, we also recognize that 1) it is not modular code in Havana and 2) there are several commercial implementations of OpenStack that use alternatives to Swift but could/would pass the capabilities test."

Specifically, the first point mentioned is incorrect. Swift is indeed "modular code", and it was so in the Havana release. One of the primary design goals in Swift is and always has been to abstract away storage volumes. The protocol Swift uses to speak to storage volumes is POSIX, and this capability has been in Swift since day one. It is and always has been possible for deployers to "swap out" the thing that Swift abstracts (namely, storage volumes). We've seen this demonstrated by deployers since day one.

During the OpenStack Havana development cycle, the Swift community cleaned up some of this volume abstraction code. That refactoring cleaned up existing capabilities. Importantly, it did not add functionality but rather made existing functionality better. In fact, the refactoring that was written was to make an existing third-party implementations simpler (Swift on GlusterFS volumes and Seagate's Kinetic platform).


The second point in the DefCore paragraph above seems to be immaterial. One of the founding principles of OpenStack is that the code is developed in the OpenStack community. From the perspective of "what is OpenStack?", it doesn't really matter if there are alternative implementations that are not managed and developed under the OpenStack governance umbrella--those things are not "OpenStack". This is echoing what Jonathan Bryce has said about OpenStack for quite some time. The "open" of OpenStack is what's important.

--John





On Jul 28, 2014, at 11:56 AM, Rob_Hirschfeld at Dell.com wrote:

> All,
>  
> I’m pleased to report that the board approved the advisory Havana capabilities (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/File:DefCore_Capabilities_Scoring.pdf ).  Note that I added the TC feedback and set all remaining 0.5 scores to a conservative 0.
>  
> I’m including the committee report we presented at the board meeting.  We spent some time prepping the board for the Designated Sections work and expect it to offered for approval at the September meeting.
>  
> I’d like to post Doodles to get some meeting times over the next few weeks including potential face to face meetings.  First we need to discuss/review the principles for selection (review)  
>  
> 1)      Principles, This Week: (Thurs or Friday) http://doodle.com/75afaha3aypkybia
> 2)      Draft DS on Low Hanging Fruit, Next Week (have have to slide) http://doodle.com/zncaidywetn9qici
> 3)      Finish DS for review, Face to Face, 8/14 and/or 8/17 http://doodle.com/giqhyd85mvtbick2
>  
> Rob
> ______________________________
> Rob Hirschfeld
> Sr. Distinguished Cloud Solution Architect
> Dell | Cloud Edge, Data Center Solutions
> cell +1 512 909-7219 blog robhirschfeld.com, twitter @zehicle
> Please note, I am based in the CENTRAL (-6) time zone
>  
> <DefCoreReportforJulyBoardMeeting.pdf>_______________________________________________
> Defcore-committee mailing list
> Defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/defcore-committee

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/defcore-committee/attachments/20140728/7fba8ec3/attachment.pgp>