Open Stack

On Thu, 19 Nov 2015, Julien Danjou wrote:

> It would be good to support that as being *normal*, not "potentially
> incorrect and random"!

Yes.

The underlying issue in this thread is the dominance of the six month
cycle and the way this is perceived to be (any may actually be) a
benefit for distributors, marketers, etc. That dominance drives the
technological and social context of OpenStack. No surprise that it is
present in our tooling and our schedules but sometimes I think it
would be great if we could fight the power, shift the paradigm, break
the chains.

But that's crazy talk, isn't it?

However it is pretty clear the dominance is not aligned with at least
some of the goals of a big tent. One goal, in particular, is making
OpenStack stuff useful and accessible to people or groups outside of
OpenStack where release-often is awesome and the needs of the packagers
aren't really that important.

I reckon (and this may be an emerging consensus somewhere in this
thread) we need to make it easier (by declaration) in the tooling
to test against whatever is desired. Can we enumerate the changes
required to make that go?

-- 
Chris Dent               (╯°□°)╯︵┻━┻            http://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent