Open Stack

+1 to extra category, and Horizon, Heat + Ceilometer being in there.

It would be nice to have the AWS APIs have some official status too.
Maybe they should get the same status.

It reminds me of the discussion around Satellite projects, which I guess is the state before incubation.

Cheers,
John

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Russell Bryant [mailto:rbryant at redhat.com]
> Sent: 07 November 2012 5:14 PM
> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] The future of Incubation and Core
> 
> On 11/07/2012 12:04 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org
> > <mailto:thierry at openstack.org>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi everyone,
> >
> >     Incubation is currently an OpenStack project status that grants a
> >     promising project more access to OpenStack shared resources,
> especially
> >     in the CI, release management and QA space. That status lets the
> >     promising project prove that it is ready to join other official
> >     OpenStack core projects for the next full development cycle.
> >
> >     In the past governance the Project Policy Board was the only decider on
> >     Incubation and Core inclusion. With the new governance, the Technical
> >     Committee is still the only decider on Incubation status and still
> >     proposes projects for Core inclusion, but the Board of Directors has the
> >     possibility to veto that Core inclusion.
> >
> >     This creates an awkward process where a project could go all the way
> >     through Incubation and be denied Core inclusion at the end of that
> >     process, basically wasting OpenStack resources. We need to evolve the
> >     Incubation process so that the question of whether a project belongs in
> >     "Core" is fully resolved as early as possible. And define how a project
> >     can enter, grow or exit the incubation process.
> >
> >     This also raises the question of whether "Core" should really be the
> >     only destination of an Incubated project. Which triggers the very
> >     question of what OpenStack Core actually is. For some it's the
> >     collection of OpenStack projects that work well and complement each
> >     other, for others Core should only include the IaaS pieces, for others
> >     they should represent the bare minimum you need to implement to be
> able
> >     to be called an "OpenStack Cloud"...
> >
> >
> > It would be healthy to allow the scope of projects managed by the
> > foundation to evolve over time to be broader than IaaS components. If
> > we need to define "OpenStack Cloud" for brand management, we should
> be
> > thinking about it at the different levels of the stack. There could be
> > a separate set of "core" projects for IaaS and PaaS, for example.
> 
> I agree that I'd like to see the project overall be inclusive instead of
> exclusive.
> 
> >     Once "Core" is defined we can evaluate the need for a category that
> >     would still be in "OpenStack" but not have the "Core" label on it.
> >     Incubation could then lead two ways.
> >
> >
> > It seems like we want a "supported" category for projects the TC feels
> > are worth spending foundation resources on but the BoD does not want
> > to include in "core" and require that deployers use them to be able to
> > claim they are an "OpenStack Cloud" as you mention above. So projects
> > would start out in the community, move to "incubated" and then to
> > "supported" after the incubation period is up. They could apply
> > separately for "core" status, after being declared "supported" by the TC.
> 
> This seems to be the crux of the issue.  If the OpenStack mark is going to be
> wrapped up in what "core" is, then I think it seems fine to keep it very
> limited, and perhaps to minimal IaaS components, but *only* if we have a
> place for everything else that is a positive addition to go.
> A new category like "supported" seems like a great idea to me.
> 
> My gut feeling of where the line would be is that Heat, Ceilometer, and
> Horizon would all be in this new category, while everything else would
> remain the core.
> 
> --
> Russell Bryant
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev