[openstack-dev] Incubation Request for Barbican
thingee at gmail.com
Tue Dec 17 21:59:49 UTC 2013
On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Jarret Raim <jarret.raim at rackspace.com>wrote:
> On 12/13/13, 4:50 AM, "Thierry Carrez" <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> >If you remove Jenkins and attach Paul Kehrer, jqxin2006 (Michael Xin),
> >Arash Ghoreyshi, Chad Lung and Steven Gonzales to Rackspace, then the
> >picture is:
> >67% of commits come from a single person (John Wood)
> >96% of commits come from a single company (Rackspace)
> >I think that's a bit brittle: if John Wood or Rackspace were to decide
> >to place their bets elsewhere, the project would probably die instantly.
> >I would feel more comfortable if a single individual didn't author more
> >than 50% of the changes, and a single company didn't sponsor more than
> >80% of the changes.
> I think these numbers somewhat miss the point. It is true that Rackspace
> is the primary sponsor of Barbican and that John Wood is the developer
> that has been on the project the longest. However, % of commits is not the
> only measure of contributions to the project. That number doesn¹t include
> the work on our chef-automation scripts or design work to figure out the
> HSM interfaces or work on the testing suite or writing our documentation
> or the million other tasks for the project.
> Rackspace is committed to this project. If John Wood leaves, we¹ll hire
> additional developers to replace him. There is no risk of the project
> lacking resources because a single person decides to work on something
> We¹ve seen other folks from HP, RedHat, Nebula, etc. say that they are
> interested in contributing and we are getting outside contributions today.
> That will only continue, but I think the risk of the project somehow
> collapsing is being overstated.
> There are problems that aren¹t necessarily the sexiest things to work on,
> but need to be done. It may be hard to get a large number of people
> interested in such a project in a short period of time. I think it would
> be a mistake to reject projects that solve important problems just because
> the team is a bit one sided at the time.
Besides it being considered "brittle" because there is one major code
I would be worried about the project being one-sided to solving the use
work for one company, but may not work for the use cases of other companies
if they have not chimed in yet. Do you feel this is not the case? Can
from somewhere other than Rackspace speak up and say they have been
with the design/discussions of Barbican?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev