Open Stack

Starting a new thread from "Re: [openstack-dev] [Kolla] [Fuel] [tc]
Looks like Mirantis is getting Fuel CCP (docker/k8s) kicked off"

Excerpts from Thierry Carrez's message of 2016-07-31 11:37:44 +0200:
> Doug Hellmann wrote:
> > There is only one way for a repository's contents to be considered
> > part of the big tent: It needs to be listed in the projects.yaml
> > file in the openstack/governance repository, associated with a
> > deliverable from a team that has been accepted as a big tent member.
> > 
> > The Fuel team has stated that they are not ready to include the
> > work in these new repositories under governance, and indeed the
> > repositories are not listed in the set of deliverables for the Fuel
> > team [1].
> > 
> > Therefore, the situation is clear, to me: They are not part of the
> > big tent.
> 
> Reading this thread after a week off, I'd like to +1 Doug's
> interpretation since it was referenced to describe the status quo.
> 
> As others have said, we wouldn't even have that discussion if the new
> repositories didn't use "fuel" as part of the naming. We probably
> wouldn't have that discussion either if the Fuel team affiliation was
> more diverse and the new repositories were an experiment of a specific
> subgroup of that team.
> 
> NB: I *do* have some concerns about single-vendor OpenStack projects
> that don't grow more diverse affiliations over time, but that's a
> completely separate topic.

I'm starting to think that perhaps we should add some sort of
expectation of a time-frame for projects that join the big tent as
single-vendor to attract other contributors.

We removed the requirement that new projects need to have some
minimal level of diversity when they join because projects asserted
that they would have a better chance of attracting other contributors
after becoming official. It might focus the team's efforts on that
priority if we said that after a year or 18 months without any
increased diversity, the project would be removed from the big tent.

Doug