Open Stack

I like it, too.  I thought we needed something like that, but couldn't
think of a way to make it sound good.  I was thinking more the legalese and
Mark found the right mix.

--rocky

On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Egle Sigler <ushnishtha at hotmail.com> wrote:

> I like that as well!
>
> On Dec 7, 2016, at 3:01 PM, Catherine Cuong Diep <cdiep at us.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> ++ on using “OpenStack Powered (TM) Guidelines”.  The name clearly
> articulates the goal and the originator of the guidelines.
>
> Catherine Diep
> ----- Forwarded by Catherine Cuong Diep/San Jose/IBM on 12/07/2016 12:07
> PM -----
>
> From: Mark Voelker <mvoelker at vmware.com>
> To: Egle Sigler <ushnishtha at hotmail.com>
> Cc: "defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org" <defcore-committee at lists.
> openstack.org>
> Date: 12/07/2016 06:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [OpenStack-DefCore] Interop - Guideline Rename Workstream
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 6, 2016, at 6:02 PM, Egle Sigler <ushnishtha at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Luz,
> >
> > Thank you for working on this! I think "OpenStack Interoperability
> Guidelines”
>
> Likewise.  I also like the idea of providing a UI hint (a label, bold
> text, something) to make these a bit more distinct in the interface.
>
>
> > or just "Interoperability Guidelines" would work, but I am also
> interested to hear what others think.
>
> Another thought: the Guidelines the Interop WG produces ultimately
> determine a product’s eligibility for the OpenStack Powered (TM) programs.
> We could refer to them as “OpenStack Powered (TM) Guidelines” which would
> help folks be clear on the relationship between the two.
>
> At Your Service,
>
> Mark T. Voelker
>
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Egle
> >
> >
> > From: Cazares, Luz <luz.cazares at intel.com>
> > Sent: Friday, December 2, 2016 12:43 PM
> > To: defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org
> > Subject: [OpenStack-DefCore] Interop - Guideline Rename Workstream
> >
> > Hello Everyone,
> >
> > As part of our rename work stream, we need a standard way to refer to
> the guidelines provided by this group.
> >
> > As we discussed in our last meeting [1]. “DefCore Guidelines” was a very
> specific name pointing to the guidelines from this group... so we need
> something at this level with the new name (not open to interpretation).
> > Some ideas:
> > ·         OpenStack Interop Guidelines
> > ·         Interoperability Guidelines
> > ·         Interop WG Guidelines
> > ·         Add label “Oficial” to differentiate our guideline from any
> other custom interop guideline.
> >
> > Please let me know your comments, concerns or any question (if any).
> >
> > [1] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/defcore/2016/
> defcore.2016-11-30-16.00.log.txt
> >
> > Thanks, Regards
> > Luz Cazares
> > _______________________________________________
> > Defcore-committee mailing list
> > Defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/defcore-committee
>
> _______________________________________________
> Defcore-committee mailing list
> Defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/defcore-committee
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Defcore-committee mailing list
> Defcore-committee at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/defcore-committee
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/defcore-committee/attachments/20161207/15a423d3/attachment.html>