Open Stack

On 04/22/2015 10:33 PM, Armando M. wrote:
> 
>         Would it make sense to capture these projects as simply
>         'affiliated', ie. with a loose relationship to Neutron, because
>         they use/integrate with Neutron in some form or another (e.g.
>         having 3rd-party, extending-api, integrating-via-plugin-model,
>         etc)? Then we could simply consider extending the projects.yaml
>         to capture this new concept (for Neutron or any other project)
>         once we defined its ontology.
> 
>         Thoughts?
> 
> 
>     That seems interesting, but given the communities stated goals
>     around Big Tent, it seems to me like affiliation or not, adding
>     these under the Neutron tent, inside the larger OpenStack Bigger
>     Tent, would be a good thing.
> 
>     Thanks,
>     Kyle
>      
> 
> 
> Thanks for clearing some of the questions I raised. I should stress the
> fact that I welcome the idea of finding a more sensible home for these
> projects in light of the big tent developments, but it seems like we're
> still pouring down the foundations. I'd rather get us to a point where
> the landscape is clear, and the dust settled. That would help us make a
> more informed decision compared to the one we can make right now.

Can you be a bit more specific about what's not clear and would help
make you feel more informed?

-- 
Russell Bryant