Open Stack

On 2017-04-14 12:32:50 +0200 (+0200), Florian Haas wrote:
[...]
> I am not sure whether Gerrit is the appropriate place to make
> the following comment, so I'm taking the liberty to post this here.

We are paying attention pretty much everywhere, so comments where
and when feels most appropriate to you are perfectly welcome. Thanks
for going through it!

[...]
> To me, it looks more like a 5-year vision than a 2-year one. In other
> words, the changes staked out, to me, are more comparable to what
> happened in OpenStack between 2012 and now, not between 2015 and now,
> and so I have my doubts about how they would fit between now and 2019.
> 
> Now I have absolutely no objections to aiming high, and many goals in
> the vision are entirely worthy of pursuit. But if you were to set out
> to do something that is fundamentally infeasible in the time allotted,
> then all you'd be heading for is frustration. In fact, it would run
> the risk of largely discounting the vision as a whole — people are far
> less likely to buy into something where compared to what is staked
> out, the realistic expectation is to achieve maybe half of it, or to
> take twice the time. I think this vision runs a considerable risk of
> that.
[...]

It's intentionally ambitious, yes, because we want to inspire and be
inspired to great achievements. At the same time, the comment period
and public review process are totally about getting some grounding
in reality from the community, keeping us honest with ourselves as
to what is or is not a reasonable goal (seeking exactly the sorts of
analysis you've provided here). We want to be sure both that our
choices of focus reflect the people we've been elected to represent,
and that those same people can see some possibility for reaching
these goals.

So to turn this around, if we were to keep it at a 2-year vision
do you believe we should lower our target metrics or reduce the
number of things we're seeking to accomplish through the technical
community (or a bit of both)?
-- 
Jeremy Stanley