Open Stack

On 19/08/14 10:37, Jay Pipes wrote:
>
> By graduating an incubated project into the integrated release, the
> Technical Committee is blessing the project as "the OpenStack way" to do
> some thing. If there are projects that are developed *in the OpenStack
> ecosystem* that are actively being developed to serve the purpose that
> an integrated project serves, then I think it is the responsibility of
> the Technical Committee to take another look at the integrated project
> and answer the following questions definitively:
>
>   a) Is the Thing that the project addresses something that the
> Technical Committee believes the OpenStack ecosystem benefits from by
> the TC making a judgement on what is "the "OpenStack way" of addressing
> that Thing.
>
> and IFF the decision of the TC on a) is YES, then:
>
>   b) Is the Vision and Implementation of the currently integrated
> project the one that the Technical Committee wishes to continue to
> "bless" as the "the OpenStack way" of addressing the Thing the project
> does.

I disagree with part (b); projects are not code - projects, like Soylent 
Green, are people. So it's not critical that the implementation is the 
one the TC wants to bless, what's critical is that the right people are 
involved to get to an implementation that the TC would be comfortable 
blessing over time. For example, everyone agrees that Ceilometer has 
room for improvement, but any implication that the Ceilometer is not 
interested in or driving towards those improvements (because of NIH or 
whatever) is, as has been pointed out, grossly unfair to the Ceilometer 
team.

I think the rest of your plan is a way of recognising this 
appropriately, that the current implementation is actually not the 
be-all and end-all of how the TC should view a project.

cheers,
Zane.