Open Stack

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Jonathan Bryce <jbryce at jbryce.com> wrote:

> On Feb 5, 2014, at 10:18 AM, Steve Gordon <sgordon at redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Andreas Jaeger" <aj at suse.com>
> >> To: "Mark McLoughlin" <markmc at redhat.com>, "OpenStack Development
> Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> >> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> >> Cc: "Jonathan Bryce" <jonathan at openstack.org>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 9:17:39 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-docs] Conventions on naming
> >>
> >> On 02/05/2014 01:09 PM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 11:52 +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> >>>> Steve Gordon wrote:
> >>>>>> From: "Anne Gentle" <anne.gentle at rackspace.com>
> >>>>>> Based on today's Technical Committee meeting and conversations with
> the
> >>>>>> OpenStack board members, I need to change our Conventions for
> service
> >>>>>> names
> >>>>>> at
> >>>>>>
> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/Conventions#Service_and_project_names
> >>>>>> .
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Previously we have indicated that Ceilometer could be named
> OpenStack
> >>>>>> Telemetry and Heat could be named OpenStack Orchestration. That's
> not
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> case, and we need to change those names.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> To quote the TC meeting, ceilometer and heat are "other modules"
> (second
> >>>>>> sentence from 4.1 in
> >>>>>> http://www.openstack.org/legal/bylaws-of-the-openstack-foundation/)
> >>>>>> distributed with the Core OpenStack Project.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here's what I intend to change the wiki page to:
> >>>>>> Here's the list of project and module names and their official names
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> capitalization:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Ceilometer module
> >>>>>> Cinder: OpenStack Block Storage
> >>>>>> Glance: OpenStack Image Service
> >>>>>> Heat module
> >>>>>> Horizon: OpenStack dashboard
> >>>>>> Keystone: OpenStack Identity Service
> >>>>>> Neutron: OpenStack Networking
> >>>>>> Nova: OpenStack Compute
> >>>>>> Swift: OpenStack Object Storage
> >>>>
> >>>> Small correction. The TC had not indicated that Ceilometer could be
> >>>> named "OpenStack Telemetry" and Heat could be named "OpenStack
> >>>> Orchestration". We formally asked[1] the board to allow (or disallow)
> >>>> that naming (or more precisely, that use of the trademark).
> >>>>
> >>>> [1]
> >>>>
> https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/resolutions/20131106-ceilometer-and-heat-official-names
> >>>>
> >>>> We haven't got a formal and clear answer from the board on that
> request
> >>>> yet. I suspect they are waiting for progress on DefCore before
> deciding.
> >>>>
> >>>> If you need an answer *now* (and I suspect you do), it might make
> sense
> >>>> to ask foundation staff/lawyers about using those OpenStack names with
> >>>> the current state of the bylaws and trademark usage rules, rather than
> >>>> the hypothetical future state under discussion.
> >>>
> >>> Basically, yes - I think having the Foundation confirm that it's
> >>> appropriate to use "OpenStack Telemetry" in the docs is the right
> thing.
> >>>
> >>> There's an awful lot of confusion about the subject and, ultimately,
> >>> it's the Foundation staff who are responsible for enforcing (and giving
> >>> advise to people on) the trademark usage rules. I've cc-ed Jonathan so
> >>> he knows about this issue.
> >>>
> >>> But FWIW, the TC's request is asking for Ceilometer and Heat to be
> >>> allowed use their "Telemetry" and "Orchestration" names in *all* of the
> >>> circumstances where e.g. Nova is allowed use its "Compute" name.
> >>>
> >>> Reading again this clause in the bylaws:
> >>>
> >>>  "The other modules which are part of the OpenStack Project, but
> >>>   not the Core OpenStack Project may not be identified using the
> >>>   OpenStack trademark except when distributed with the Core OpenStack
> >>>   Project."
> >>>
> >>> it could well be said that this case of naming conventions in the docs
> >>> for the entire OpenStack Project falls under the "distributed with"
> case
> >>> and it is perfectly fine to refer to "OpenStack Telemetry" in the docs.
> >>> I'd really like to see the Foundation staff give their opinion on this,
> >>> though.
>
> In this case, we are talking about documentation that is produced and
> distributed with the integrated release to cover the Core OpenStack Project
> and the "modules" that are distributed together with the Core OpenStack
> Project in the integrated release. This is the intended use case for the
> exception Mark quoted above from the Bylaws, and I think it is perfectly
> fine to refer to the integrated components in the OpenStack release
> documentation as OpenStack components.
>
>
> >> What Steve is asking IMO is whether we have to change "OpenStack
> >> Telemetry" to "Ceilometer module" or whether we can just say "Telemetry"
> >> without the OpenStack in front of it,
> >>
> >> Andreas
> >
> > Constraining myself to the topic of what we should be using in the
> documentation, yes this is what I'm asking. This makes more sense to me
> than switching to calling them the "Heat module" and "Ceilometer module"
> because:
> >
> > 1) It resolves the issue of using the OpenStack mark where it
> (apparently) shouldn't be used.
> > 2) It means we're still using the "formal" name for the program as
> defined by the TC [1] (it is my understanding this remains the purview of
> the TC, it's control of the mark that the board are exercising here).
> > 3) It is a more minor change/jump and therefore provides more continuity
> and less confusion to readers (and similarly if one of them ever becomes
> endorsed as core and we need to switch again).
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > [1]
> http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/governance/tree/reference/programs.yaml
>
>
> It's possible that in the future the Board may adjust the language to be
> explicitly more restrictive. In that case, I would agree with Steve that it
> would still make sense to still use the approved generic names on their own
> without the mark in the documentation rather than the codenames.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
Thanks Jonathan. Adding the openstack-docs list in my reply.

I'm amending the wiki page to this wording to reflect today's reality:

Here's the list of project names and their official names and
capitalization:
* Ceilometer: Telemetry or Telemetry module
* Cinder: OpenStack Block Storage
* Glance: OpenStack Image Service
* Heat: Orchestration or Orchestration module
* Horizon: OpenStack dashboard
* Keystone: OpenStack Identity Service
* Neutron: OpenStack Networking
* Nova: OpenStack Compute
* Swift: OpenStack Object Storage

About 7 files need changing for openstack-manuals for Telemetry, and 6
files in openstack-manuals for Orchestration. These bugs track the work:

https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1277105
https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1277107

These patches would need to be backported to stable/havana, I'd like to see
one for Orchestration, one for Telemetry for ease of reviews.

Thanks,
Anne


>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20140206/8abfe292/attachment.html>