[openstack-dev] [cinder] drbdmanage is no more GPL2
duncan.thomas at gmail.com
Mon Dec 12 16:44:53 UTC 2016
On 12 December 2016 at 16:14, Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis at gmx.com> wrote:
> Honestly, my opinion is it's just fine as it is, and the fact that this
> license has changed doesn't make any difference.
> For most external storage there is _something_ that the deployer needs
> to do outside of install and configure OpenStack to get things set up
> and working. Whether that is setting up an physical array or downloading
> and installing a client library on their own - that's just part of the
> requirements for whatever solution they chose to deploy.
> It would be great if things were all open and an all in one
> download->install->run solution, but that's not reality and not what
> everyone is looking for out of OpenStack. So be it.
I'm going to respectfully but forcefully disagree here, and even go so far
as to suggest that the failing of Openstack is that people /do/ want that,
and Openstack is, in many areas (not just cinder) simply unable to provide
such a solution.
I'm willing to bet you can't find a customer who says "yes, we want to mess
around with downloading things from different sources, worrying about
versions, keeping copies of things in case companies decide to take their
portal down... oh and figuring out how to get those onto my nodes is great
fun, we'll have a double helping of that please." That is, frankly,
nonsense. Sure some people might put up with it, but I don't think anybody
Having read the Openstack rules linked to earlier in the thread (
https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/licensing.html) we're clearly
Having worked to try to build a turnkey Openstack distro, I can say with
authority that the cinder soft dependencies are absolutely a obstacle, and
in some cases (like customers who want a fully offline/airgapped install)
an insurmountable one.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev