[openstack-dev] The future of Incubation and Core - a motion
Gabriel Hurley
Gabriel.Hurley at nebula.com
Wed Nov 14 20:13:21 UTC 2012
I'm good with the revised motion, with two points of note:
1. Having the classifications (Services + Library + Gating + Supporting or otherwise) in the bylaws still seems unnecessarily restrictive. Explicitly categorizing them gains us nothing and only serves to make us revisit these debates in the future. That said, if they have to be there, that set is acceptable.
2. By altering the definition of "Core" in this manner I think a reevaluation of the makeup of the Technical Committee has to go hand-in-hand. As Thierry mentioned in the TC meeting discussion, making the TC 100% elected seats (dropping the guaranteed seats for "Core Project" PTLs) would be one avenue for addressing the imbalance in the new definition.
All the best,
- Gabriel
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thierry Carrez [mailto:thierry at openstack.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 7:17 AM
> To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] The future of Incubation and Core - a motion
>
> Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> >> What I think we actually want is to redefine "OpenStack projects" as
> >> being "Services + Library + Gating + Supporting" (instead of Core +
> >> Library + Gating + Supporting), with "OpenStack Services" being the
> >> projects sharing the same release cycle. Have incubation be the trial
> >> period to prove you can become an official OpenStack Service. Then
> >> let the BoD pick which of those "OpenStack projects" they want to
> >> consider "core" for trademark use.
> >
> > Do we really need to have these classifications in the bylaws?
>
> No, we don't really need to set the classification in stone in the bylaws (and
> we would gain in future flexibility if it wasn't). We just need to have the
> OpenStack projects being defined as a superset of the Core projects. The
> current bylaws, however, mention the current classification. So if we don't
> make that classification evolve, we still might need to revisit that definition.
>
> > How does this update sound?
> > [...]
>
> Sounds good to me.
>
> --
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list