Open Stack

On Thu, 15 Jun 2017, Thierry Carrez wrote:

> I'd like to propose that we introduce a new concept: "OpenStack-Hosted
> projects". There would be "OpenStack projects" on one side, and
> "Projects hosted on OpenStack infrastructure" on the other side (all
> still under the openstack/ git repo prefix). We'll stop saying "official
> OpenStack project" and "unofficial OpenStack project". The only
> "OpenStack projects" will be the official ones. We'll chase down the
> last mentions of "big tent" in documentation and remove it from our
> vocabulary.

I agree that something needs to change, but also agree with some of
the followups that the distinction you're proposing isn't
particularly memorable. Nor, if we put ourselves in the shoes of an
outside observer, is "OpenStack project" versus "hosted on OpenStack
infrastructure" particularly meaningful. From many angles it all
looks like OpenStack.

Part of the issue is that the meaning and value of being  an
"OpenStack project" (an "official" one) is increasingly diffuse.
I suspect that if we could make that more concrete then things like
names would be easier to decide. Some things we might ask ourselves
to help clarify the situation include (as usual, some of these
questions may have obvious answers, but enumerating them can help
make things explicit):

* What motivates a project to seek status as an OpenStack project?
   * What do they get?
   * What do they lose?

* What motivates OpenStack to seek more projects?
   * What does OpenStack get?
   * What does OpenStack lose?
   * What gets more complicated when there are more projects?

* Why would a project choose to be "hosted on OpenStack
   infrastructure" instead of be an "OpenStack project"?

* Why should OpenStack be willing to host projects that are not
   "OpenStack projects"?

* When a project goes from the status of "OpenStack project" to
   "hosted on OpenStack infrastructure" (as currently being discussed
   with regard to Fuel) what is the project losing, what does the
   change signify and why should anyone care?

(I'm sure other people can come up with a few more questions.)

I think that if we're going to focus on this issue then we need to
make sure that we focus on marshalling the value and resources that
are required to support a project. That is: it has to be worth
everyone's time and enery to be and have (official) projects. It's
likely that this could mean that some projects are unable to be
(official) projects anymore.

-- 
Chris Dent                  ┬──┬◡ﾉ(° -°ﾉ)       https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent