Open Stack

John Griffith wrote:
> Maybe it would make more sense rather than deciding how fast the project
> is promoted today, instead we focus on acceptance of the separate
> project, and further in the cycle make the determination of incubation
> status etc.
> 
> Even with Cinder this is how we went about it, we didn't say up front
> "skip incubation" as I recall.  Instead, we first decided "yes/no" on
> new project, then around the third milestone IIRC we voted on the next
> phase, incubation or skip etc based on how things went during the
> release cycle (gerrit, following the process etc etc).
> 
> Just my opinion but I don't think there's enough data to say today/this
> week that we should "skip incubation" and short cut.  If we look at how
> things are shaping up 3 months from now we'd actually have data to put
> into the context of the decision.

That's a very good point. For starters we should decide now if it makes
sense in the long run to separate the BareMetal stuff from the rest of
Nova and into its own project (i.e. accept a future reduction of scope
for Nova)... My personal view on that would be +1, if Nova's PTL
supports the idea of course.

Then in a few weeks when that separate project is seeded we can revisit
the incubation model for it... My personal view for that would be to let
it go through classic incubation, but that opinion may change depending
on how the seeding goes.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Chair, OpenStack Technical Committee