Open Stack

On 2016-11-29 13:40:56 -0800 (-0800), Clint Byrum wrote:
> Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2016-11-29 21:10:35 +0000:
[...]
> > I also feel very strongly that those alone would be terrible reasons
> > to consider becoming an official project team under the governance
> > of the OpenStack Technical Committee. Our project governance is not
> > intended as a means of marketing and advertising products, and I'm
> > going to do my best to make sure that it's extremely ineffective at
> > that for any companies who try to (ab)use it to those ends.
> 
> This struck me as overly aggressive. Open Source is a social model, and
> if a commercial entity would like to participate in that social model
> in good faith, I think that's beneficial to everyone else. Throwing
> up a "not for commercial use" barrier to their participation will just
> discourage them and others from investing more.

Thanks, it was not at all my intent to be aggressive towards Sam and
I neglected to state that I agree the first part of his reply (which
I had trimmed) was a fine set of reasons to seek becoming an
official OpenStack project team. So sorry, Sam (and everyone else)!

It was however my intent to be aggressive in defending our use of
project governance for actually governing the direction of
OpenStack, and I don't want to see it perverted into a product
marketing platform. We need better ways to help vendors advertise
their driver support without bringing the TC into the picture as a
deciding body. It's more work for the TC, and it gets in the way of
what everyone actually wants to accomplish.
-- 
Jeremy Stanley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 949 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20161129/956fb37e/attachment.pgp>