Open Stack

On Jul 14, 2017, at 14:10, Ed Leafe <ed at leafe.com> wrote:
> 
> On Jul 14, 2017, at 2:17 PM, Zane Bitter <zbitter at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> * The pool of OpenStack developers is a fixed resource, and if we make it clear that some projects are unwelcome then their developers will be reassigned to 'core' projects in a completely zero-sum process. (Nnnnnnope.)
> 
> Yeah, I’ve heard this many times, and always shake my head. If I want to work on X, and X is not in OpenStack governance, I’m going to work on that anyway because I need it. Or maybe on a similar project. I’m going to scratch my itch.
> 
>> * While code like e.g. the Nova scheduler might be so complicated today that even the experts routinely complain about its terrible design,[1] if only we could add dozens more cooks (see above) it would definitely get much simpler and easier to maintain. (Bwahahahahahahaha.)
> 
> No, they need to appoint me as the Scheduler Overlord with the power to smite all those who propose complicated code!
> 
>> * Once we make it clear to users that under no circumstances will we ever e.g. provide them with notifications about when a server has failed, ways to orchestrate a replacement, and an API to update DNS to point to the new one, then they will finally stop demanding bloat-inducing VMWare/oVirt-style features that enable them to treat cloud servers like pets. (I. don't. even.)
> 
> Again, itches will be scratched. What I think is more important is a marketing issue, not a technical one. When I think of what it means to be a “core” project, I think of things that people looking to “get cloudy” would likely want. It isn’t until you start using a cloud that the additional projects you mention become important. So simplifying what is presented to the cloud market is a good thing, as it won’t confuse people as to what OpenStack is. But that doesn’t require any of the other projects be stopped or in any way discouraged.
> 
> -- Ed Leafe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


Chiming in from the believed-to-be-dead Chef project, I work on it because it scratches my itch. I served as PTL because it did and does scratch my itch. Working on it in any capacity that moves things forward continues to scratch that itch. We have less of a technical problem, not to downplay our tech debt, as we’re still pushing patches and shuffling reviews. However, we have a huge perception problem and equally large marketing problem, which is apparently an unwritten side job of being a PTL. We didn’t get that memo until the Big Tent was deemed too smothering. The fun part about being a PTL with effectively no team is that, when you or your counterpart isn’t actively marketing and spending more time making noise than working, people call you dead to your face. Even when you spend the time and money to go to marketing events.

--
Best,

Samuel Cassiba

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170714/71d81afd/attachment.sig>