Open Stack

On 04/30/2013 04:41 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> John Griffith wrote:
>> Maybe it would make more sense rather than deciding how fast the project
>> is promoted today, instead we focus on acceptance of the separate
>> project, and further in the cycle make the determination of incubation
>> status etc.
>>
>> Even with Cinder this is how we went about it, we didn't say up front
>> "skip incubation" as I recall.  Instead, we first decided "yes/no" on
>> new project, then around the third milestone IIRC we voted on the next
>> phase, incubation or skip etc based on how things went during the
>> release cycle (gerrit, following the process etc etc).
>>
>> Just my opinion but I don't think there's enough data to say today/this
>> week that we should "skip incubation" and short cut.  If we look at how
>> things are shaping up 3 months from now we'd actually have data to put
>> into the context of the decision.
> 
> That's a very good point. For starters we should decide now if it makes
> sense in the long run to separate the BareMetal stuff from the rest of
> Nova and into its own project (i.e. accept a future reduction of scope
> for Nova)... My personal view on that would be +1, if Nova's PTL
> supports the idea of course.

+1 from me.

> Then in a few weeks when that separate project is seeded we can revisit
> the incubation model for it... My personal view for that would be to let
> it go through classic incubation, but that opinion may change depending
> on how the seeding goes.
> 

My current opinion is to go through classic incubation, as well.  From
this thread, I'm not sure I saw anyone arguing otherwise ... but we can
revisit later if needed.

-- 
Russell Bryant