Open Stack

Well said. I think those are good and valid things on which to ruminate.

For me, I think that RedDwarf is a good fit for us, and I see it as an
essential part of a cloud offering. I'm not sure about where it falls in
the IaaS/PaaS split, and I have to be honest I don't care, because I
don't think that a user of a cloud ever says "today I want to use some
IaaS!"

Customers building applications need various resources that they
typically ask IT for. One of those resources is machines. One is networking.

A very frequent one is some amount of database resources that sit
somewhere that they don't know a ton about. They expect that the people
managing such a resource are going to understand about things like high
availability and backups, and they can just use it as a database.

That to me sounds like a perfect candidate for this thing we do - which
at the end of the day enables devs to write applications focusing on
what they know (the app) and ignoring what they don't know (database HA,
vlans, raid configuration)

Eventually, as I think everyone knows, I want to be able to describe a
complete openstack install in terms of openstack. We don't have answers
for database, messaging or dns yet - but we're getting close.

On 04/25/2013 04:26 PM, Gabriel Hurley wrote:
> I totally agree that the application deserves consideration by the
> TC.
> 
> Throwing thoughts out there:
> 
> RedDwarf strikes me as a project that is an important part of the
> OpenStack ecosystem, has significant value and the potential for
> significant adoption, yet perhaps is not appropriate for the scope of
> OpenStack proper...
> 
> Since we're talking about Integrated Release and not "Core" doesn't
> it ultimately comes down to "is RedDwarf of sufficient value and
> significance to justify the allocation of the limited resources of
> CI, Docs, Release Management, summit time, etc.?" I have little doubt
> that RedDwarf is capable of matching the OpenStack release process
> and their code mostly looks sane. So this is more about whether this
> is an appropriate allocation of priority and impact on the
> ecosystem.
> 
> I don't know that I have any answers here, but those are the ideas
> I'm ruminating on.
> 
> - Gabriel
> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Monty Taylor
>> [mailto:mordred at inaugust.com] Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 6:40
>> AM To: openstack-tc at lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-tc]
>> Reddwarf application for incubation
>> 
>> I do not believe that we are waiting on anything from the BoD at
>> the moment. The outcome of the IncUp joint subcommittee was to
>> affirm the TC's power and oversight over deciding what goes into
>> the Integrated Release. The committee, and then subsequently the TC
>> and the BoD all were on board with that outcome.
>> 
>> Effectively, this means that the responsibility for deciding the
>> scope of the OpenStack Integrated Release falls on our shoulders as
>> the technical leadership of the project. I think that's great.
>> 
>> That said, it's entirely possible that we, as the TC, could develop
>> a set of guidelines describing what we think OpenStack is and isn't
>> ... but I don't think that's particularly necessary. OpenStack is
>> what we say it is, and further its scope is the scope of the things
>> that the community of participants show up to work on.
>> 
>> I see no reason to not consider the reddwarf application on
>> Tuesday.
>> 
>> I will say, however, that given summit sessions, reddwarf is almost
>> certainly going to need to change its name...
>> 
>> On 04/25/2013 12:55 AM, John Dickinson wrote:
>>> AFAIK, we have yet to receive any direction from the OpenStack
>>> BoD on the question of the scope of OpenStack. As such,
>>> especially with somethink like Red Dwarf which appears to be
>>> completely built on top of existing OpenStack projects, should we
>>> wait to consider the application?
>>> 
>>> Perhaps having somewhat of a backup in incubation considerations
>>> will put some pressure on the BoD to more quickly answer the
>>> "what is OpenStack" question.
>>> 
>>> --John
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Apr 22, 2013, at 5:16 AM, Thierry Carrez
>>> <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Michael Basnight wrote:
>>>>> The following wiki page has the Reddwarf database as a
>>>>> service application for incubation. Thank you for your
>>>>> consideration!
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/ReddwarfAppliesForIncubation
>>>> 
>>>> Hi!
>>>> 
>>>> I'd like to give more time for the Technical Committee members
>>>> to recover from the Summit and look into this, so we should
>>>> consider this application at the meeting next week (April 30).
>>>> 
>>>> In the mean time, could you repost your application for
>>>> incubation link to the openstack-dev ML ASAP, so that it can
>>>> openly be discussed there ?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> 
>>>> -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) Chair, OpenStack Technical Committee
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________ OpenStack-
>> TC mailing
>>>> list OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org 
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> 
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-
>> TC mailing
>>> list OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org 
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC
>> mailing list OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org 
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ OpenStack-TC mailing
> list OpenStack-TC at lists.openstack.org 
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-tc
>