Open Stack

Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2016-11-29 21:52:35 +0000:
> 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.

Thanks for clarifying Jeremy. :)