Open Stack

On 02/05/2016 02:16 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
> On 02/05/2016 01:17 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> So, is Poppy "open core"?
>
> Whether or not it is, I'm not sure how it is part of a Ubiquitous Open
> Source Cloud Platform. Because it only enables the use of commerical
> services.
>
> It's fine that it's open source software. I just don't think it's OpenStack.

So, I've read through this ML thread a couple times now. I see arguments 
on both sides of the coin here.

I'm no fan of open core. Never have been. So it irks me that Poppy can't 
work with any non-proprietary backend. But, as others have said, that 
isn't the Poppy team's fault.

However, even though it's not the Poppy team's fault, I think the fact 
that the Poppy project user's only choice when using Poppy is to use a 
non-free backend disqualifies Poppy from being an OpenStack project. The 
fact that the Poppy team follows the four Opens and genuinely wants to 
align with the OpenStack development methodology and processes is 
admirable and we should certainly encourage that behaviour, including 
welcoming Poppy into our CI platform for as much as we can (given the 
obvious limitations around functional testing of Poppy). However, at the 
end of the day, I agree with Sean that this non-free restriction 
inherent in Poppy means it should not be included in the 
openstack/governance projects.yaml file as an "official" OpenStack project.

I've left this comment on the review accordingly.

Best,
-jay