Open Stack

On 08/02/2016 06:16 AM, Chris Dent wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Aug 2016, James Bottomley wrote:
> 
>> Making no judgments about the particular exemplars here, I would just
>> like to point out that one reason why projects exist with very little
>> diversity is that they "just work".  Usually people get involved when
>> something doesn't work or they need something changed to work for them.
>> However, people do have a high tolerance for "works well enough"
>> meaning that a project can be functional, widely used and not
>> attracting diverse contributors.  A case in point for this type of
>> project in the non-openstack world would be openssl but there are many
>> others.
> 
> In a somewhat related point, the kinds of metrics we use in OpenStack to
> evaluate project health tend to have the unintended consequence of
> requiring the projects to always be growing and changing (i.e. churning)
> rather than trending towards stability and maturity.
> 
> I'd like to think that we can have some projects that can be called
> "done".
> 
> So we need to consider the side effects of the measurements we're
> taking and not let the letter of the new laws kill the spirit.
> 
> Yours in cliches,

I do understand that concern. Metrics games definitely can have
unintended consequences. Are there instances of software in our
ecosystem that you consider done, single vendor, and would be negatively
impacted by not being called OpenStack?

	-Sean

-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net