Open Stack

In Murano project we do see a positive impact of BigTent model. Since
Murano was accepted as a part of BigTent community we had a lot of
conversations with potential users. They were driven exactly by the fact
that Murano is now "officially" recognized in OpenStack community. It might
be a wrong perception, but this is a perception they have.
Most of the guys we met  are enterprises for whom catalog functionality is
interesting. The problem with enterprises is that their thinking periods
are often more than 6-9 months. They are not individuals who can start
contributing over a night. They need some time to create proper org
structure changes to organize development process. The benefits of that is
more stable and predictable development over time as soon as they start
contributing.

Thanks
Gosha



On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 4:44 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:

> You may also find my explanation about the Big Tent helpful in this
> interview with Niki Acosta and Jeff Dickey:
>
> http://blogs.cisco.com/cloud/ospod-29-jay-pipes
>
> Best,
> -jay
>
>
> On 06/16/2015 06:09 AM, Flavio Percoco wrote:
>
>> On 16/06/15 04:39 -0400, gordon chung wrote:
>>
>>> i won't speak to whether this confirms/refutes the usefulness of the
>>> big tent.
>>> that said, probably as a by-product of being in non-stop meetings with
>>> sales/
>>> marketing/managers for last few days, i think there needs to be better
>>> definitions (or better publicised definitions) of what the goals of
>>> the big
>>> tent are. from my experience, they've heard of the big tent and they
>>> are, to
>>> varying degrees, critical of it. one common point is that they see it as
>>> greater fragmentation to a process that is already too slow.
>>>
>>
>> Not saying this is the final answer to all the questions but at least
>> it's a good place to start from:
>>
>>
>> https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2015/summit-videos/presentation/the-big-tent-a-look-at-the-new-openstack-projects-governance
>>
>>
>>
>> That said, this is great feedback and we may indeed need to do a
>> better job to explain the big tent. That presentation, I believe, was
>> an attempt to do so.
>>
>> Flavio
>>
>>
>>> just giving my fly-on-the-wall view from the other side.
>>>
>>> On 15/06/2015 6:20 AM, Joe Gordon wrote:
>>>
>>>    One of the stated problems the 'big tent' is supposed to solve is:
>>>
>>>    'The binary nature of the integrated release results in projects
>>> outside
>>>    the integrated release failing to get the recognition they deserve.
>>>    "Non-official" projects are second- or third-class citizens which
>>> can't get
>>>    development resources. Alternative solutions can't emerge in the
>>> shadow of
>>>    the blessed approach. Becoming part of the integrated release,
>>> which was
>>>    originally designed to be a technical decision, quickly became a
>>>    life-or-death question for new projects, and a political/community
>>>    minefield.' [0]
>>>
>>>    Meaning projects should see an uptick in development once they drop
>>> their
>>>    second-class citizenship and join OpenStack. Now that we have been
>>> living
>>>    in the world of the big tent for several months now, we can see if
>>> this
>>>    claim is true.
>>>
>>>    Below is a list of the first few few projects to join OpenStack
>>> after the
>>>    big tent, All of which have now been part of OpenStack for at least
>>> two
>>>    months.[1]
>>>
>>>    * Mangum -  Tue Mar 24 20:17:36 2015
>>>    * Murano - Tue Mar 24 20:48:25 2015
>>>    * Congress - Tue Mar 31 20:24:04 2015
>>>    * Rally - Tue Apr 7 21:25:53 2015
>>>
>>>    When looking at stackalytics [2] for each project, we don't see any
>>>    noticeably change in number of reviews, contributors, or number of
>>> commits
>>>    from before and after each project joined OpenStack.
>>>
>>>    So what does this mean? At least in the short term moving from
>>> Stackforge
>>>    to OpenStack does not result in an increase in development
>>> resources (too
>>>    early to know about the long term).  One of the three reasons for
>>> the big
>>>    tent appears to be unfounded, but the other two reasons hold.  The
>>> only
>>>    thing I think this information changes is what peoples expectations
>>> should
>>>    be when applying to join OpenStack.
>>>
>>>    [0] https://github.com/openstack/governance/blob/master/resolutions/
>>>    20141202-project-structure-reform-spec.rst
>>>    [1] Ignoring OpenStackClent since the repos were always in
>>> OpenStack it
>>>    just didn't have a formal home in the governance repo.
>>>    [2] h http://stackalytics.com/?module=magnum-group&metric=commits
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>>    OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>    Unsubscribe:
>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>>    http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> gord
>>>
>>>
>>
>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



-- 
Georgy Okrokvertskhov
Architect,
OpenStack Platform Products,
Mirantis
http://www.mirantis.com
Tel. +1 650 963 9828
Mob. +1 650 996 3284
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150616/53d6de6b/attachment.html>