Open Stack

On 15/06/17 03:23 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>
> We are very open with our hosting, allowing projects that have not
> yet, and may never, sign up to be governed by the TC to use our
> infrastructure services. We expect them to be related in some way,
> but we have even imported projects when we've taken over maintenance
> (several Oslo libs fall into this category, as do a few others like
> mox3 and sqlalchemy-migrate). With the move away from stackforge,
> and other changes in that hosting (that were made for good reasons
> to make the infra team's lives easier and to make it simpler for a
> project to join the set of governed projects), we have removed most
> of the other technical signals about which projects are in that
> "official" list and which are not.  We did not at the same time
> remove all of the people in the world who want to understand what
> is, and what is not, "in" OpenStack.

i see, so this is less an existential question of 'what is openstack' 
and more 'how to differentiate governance projects from a random repo 
created last weekend'

this might have been just me, but big tent was exactly 'big tent == 
governance' so when i read 'moving away from "big tent"' i think 'what 
is this *new* thing we're moving to and if we're redefining this new 
thing, what for?'. it seems this is not the case.

> And for the record, from the TC's perspective, being a governed
> project has nothing to do with whether the participants are sponsors
> of the foundation.

sorry, i probably wasn't clear, i simply noticed that it was a corporate 
sponsor that was misusing the 'big tent' name so was just thinking we 
could easily tell them, that's not what it means. wasn't suggesting 
anything else by sponsor comment.


-- 
gord