Open Stack

On 09:35 Jun 14, Ed Leafe wrote:
> On Jun 14, 2016, at 8:57 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> 
> > A few months ago we had the discussion about what "no open core" means in
> > 2016, in the context of the Poppy team candidacy. With our reading at the
> > time we ended up rejecting Poppy partly because it was interfacing with
> > proprietary technologies. However, I think what we originally wanted to
> > ensure with this rule was that no specific organization would use the
> > OpenStack open source code as crippled bait to sell their specific
> > proprietary add-on.
> 
> I saw the problem with Poppy was that since it depended on a proprietary
> product, there was no way to run any meaningful testing with it, since you
> can’t simply download that product into your testing environment. Had there
> been an equivalent free software implementation, I think many would have not
> had as strong an objection in including Poppy.

Yup, I spoke loud and repeated this in the discussion many times. There was no
open source reference implementation to base the API off of, just a proprietary
solution. I feel starting that direction with any new project in some open
source space where we want multiple solutions to plug in is just a disaster
waiting to happen.

-- 
Mike Perez