Hi, On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 2:57 PM Thierry Carrez <thierry@openstack.org> wrote:
Mohammed Naser wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 10:53 AM Sean McGinnis <sean.mcginnis@gmx.com> wrote:
[...] Cinder has been useful stand alone for several years now, but I have also seen the reaction of "why would I use that, I don't need all of that OpenStack stuff".
I wonder if we need to do something better to highlight and message that there are certain components of OpenStack that are useful as independent components that can exist on their own.
I think that Sean here hit on the most critical point we need to drive. There's no amount of splitting that would resolve this.
I think a large part of the problem lies in the way we communicate about OpenStack. In particular, it is difficult to find a webpage that talks about ironic as a software component you might want to use.
Practical exercise: find ironic on openstack.org. The best path involves two clicks and you only land on a component page[1] without much explanations. Or you reach https://www.openstack.org/bare-metal/ which is great, but more about the use case than the software. We are collectively to blame for this. The data on that component page is maintained by a repo[2] that I issued multiple calls for help for, and yet there aren't many changes proposed to expand the information presented there. And having a mix of a Foundation and a product website coexist at openstack.org means the information is buried so deeply someone born in this century would likely never find it.
I didn't even know about osf/openstack-map.. Either I'm living under a rock (possible) or there may be some improvements in the internal communication as well (not blaming anyone, we're all in it together).
I think we need to improve on that, but it takes time due to how search engines work. I may sound like a broken record, but the solution in my opinion is to have basic, component-specific websites for components that can be run standalone. Think ironic.io (except .io domains are horrible and it's already taken). A website that would solely be dedicated to presenting Ironic, and would only mention OpenStack in the fineprint, or as a possible integration. It would list Ironic releases outside of openstack cycle context, and display Ironic docs without the openstack branding.
That would go further to solve the issue than any governance change IMHO. Thoughts?
I think I've said it already, but it's a great idea and should be done no matter how this discussion ends up. Dmitry
[1] https://www.openstack.org/software/releases/train/components/ironic [2] https://opendev.org/osf/openstack-map/
-- Thierry Carrez (ttx)