Open Stack

Jay Pipes wrote:
> [...]
> If either of the above answers is NO, then I believe the Technical
> Committee should recommend that the integrated project be removed from
> the integrated release.
> 
> HOWEVER, I *also* believe that the previously-integrated project should
> not just be cast away back to Stackforge. I think the project should
> remain in its designated Program and should remain in the openstack/
> code namespace. Furthermore, active, competing visions and
> implementations of projects that address the Thing the
> previously-integrated project addressed should be able to apply to join
> the same Program, and *also* live in the openstack/ namespace.
> 
> All of these projects should be able to live in the Program, in the
> openstack/ code namespace, for as long as the project is actively
> developed, and let the contributor communities in these competing
> projects *naturally* work to do any of the following:
> 
>  * Pick a best-of-breed implementation from the projects that address
> the same Thing
>  * Combine code and efforts to merge the good bits of multiple projects
> into one
>  * Let multiple valid choices of implementation live in the same Program
> with none of them being "blessed" by the TC to be part of the integrated
> release

That would work if an OpenStack Program was just like a category under
which you can file projects. However, OpenStack programs are not a
competition category where we could let multiple competing
implementations fight it out for becoming "the" solution; they are
essentially just a team of people working toward a common goal, having
meetings and sharing/electing the same technical lead.

I'm not convinced you would set competing solutions for a fair
competition by growing them inside the same team (and under the same
PTL!) as the current mainstream/blessed option. How likely is the
Orchestration PTL to make the decision to drop Heat in favor of a new
contender ?

I'm also concerned with making a program a collection of competing
teams, rather than a single team sharing the same meetings and electing
the same leadership, working all together. I don't want the teams
competing to get a number of contributors that would let them game the
elections and take over the program leadership. I think such a setup
would just increase the political tension inside programs, and we have
enough of it already.

If we want to follow your model, we probably would have to dissolve
programs as they stand right now, and have blessed categories on one
side, and teams on the other (with projects from some teams being
blessed as the current solution). That would leave the horizontal
programs like Docs, QA or Infra, where the team and the category are the
same thing, as outliers again (like they were before we did programs).

Finally, I'm slightly concerned with the brand aspect -- letting *any*
project call themselves "OpenStack something" (which is what living
under the openstack/* namespace gives you) just because they happen to
compete with an existing openstack project sounds like a recipe for
making sure "openstack" doesn't mean anything upstream anymore.

Regards,

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)