Open Stack

On 07:57 Feb 05, Dean Troyer wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>
> wrote:
> 
> > My personal take on that is that we can draw a line in the sand for what
> > is acceptable as an official project in the upstream OpenStack open source
> > effort. It should have a fully-functional, production-grade open source
> > implementation. If you need proprietary software or a commercial entity to
> > fully use the functionality of a project or getting serious about it, then
> > it should not be accepted in OpenStack as an official project. It can still
> > live as a non-official project and even be hosted under OpenStack
> > infrastructure, but it should not be part of "OpenStack". That is how I
> > would interpret "no open core" in OpenStack 2016.
> >
> 
> Should we host projects that have no hope of becoming official projects due
> to this sort of criteria?  Would we host GPL-only projects under openstack/?

With previous threads complaining about low on infra resources to help with
stable releases, I'd actually say no we shouldn't host them. We're already low
with the sunsetting of a big public cloud.

-- 
Mike Perez