Open Stack

On 09/09/16 10:22 +0000, John Davidge wrote:
>Thierry Carrez wrote:
>
>>[...]
>>In the last years there were a lot of "questions" asked by random
>>contributors, especially around the "One OpenStack" principle (which
>>seems to fuel most of the reaction here). Remarks like "we should really
>>decide once and for all if OpenStack is a collection of independent
>>projects, or one thing".
>>
>>A lot of people actually ignore that this question was already asked,
>>pretty early on (by John Dickinson in June 2011). Back then it was
>>settled by the PPB (the ancestor to the TC). You can read it all
>>here[1]. It was never brought again as a proposed change to the TC, so
>>that decision from June 2011 is still defining how we should think about
>>OpenStack.
>>
>>Most of the TC members know the governance history and know those
>>principles. That is, after all, one of the reasons you elect them for.
>>But we realized that the people asking those questions again and again
>>were not at fault. It was our failure to *document* this history
>>properly which caused the issue. Took us some time to gather the courage
>>to write it, then finally Monty wrote a draft, and I turned it into a
>>change.
>
>To provide a counter point, I think the reason this question is asked so
>often is not because the TC has failed to *document* this policy, but that
>it has failed to *comply* with it.
>
>I¹m of course referring to the introduction of The Big Tent. This is the
>moment that OpenStack stopped being: ³A single product made of a lot of
>independent, but cooperating, components.² And became: ³A collection of
>independent projects that work together for some level of integration and
>releases.²
>
>This is in direct contradiction to the stated and collectively understood
>goal of the project, and has left many scratching their heads.
>
>The principles as written in the review do not accurately describe the
>current state of the project. To make it so that they do, we either need
>to change the principles or change the project. As I see it, our options
>are:
>
>1. Adjust the project to reflect the principles by abolishing The Big Tent.
>2. Adjust the principles to reflect the project by redefining it as: ³A
>collection of independent projects that work together for some level of
>integration and releases.²

I think #2 is missing a critical part, which is that these "independent"
projects are working towards a unified mission. This differentiates OpenStack
from many other communities out there and it helps understanding the principles
and other changes a bit better. But I might be biased here :/

Either way, writing down this principles has proven the effort useful already.
It doesn't matter if the outcome is a well thought-out document or a set of
changes to the community. The time spent writing this document is already
helping us to get rid of some tribal knowledge.

Flavio

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 847 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160909/27d3ac51/attachment.pgp>