Open Stack

On 11/07/2012 12:13 PM, Russell Bryant wrote:
> 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.

Yeah, that's been that problem so far: there hasn't been any other
end-state than going from incubation into core (other than, of course,
not going into core, which has not occurred for any project that has
gone into incubation).

I would fully support (pun intended) the dichotomy you describe above.

However, from a semantic perspective, we already have "core", "library"
[1] and "supporting" projects [2]. So, it might be best to use some
other term than "supported", since it is so close to "supporting"...

> 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.

++

-jay

[1] http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Accepted/LibraryProjectDefinition
[2]
http://wiki.openstack.org/Governance/Accepted/SupportingProjectDefinition