Open Stack

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017, at 08:48 AM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
> On 06/19/2017 05:42 PM, Chris Hoge wrote:
> > 
> > 
> >> On Jun 15, 2017, at 5:57 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Sean Dague wrote:
> >>> [...]
> >>> I think those are all fine. The other term that popped into my head was
> >>> "Friends of OpenStack" as a way to describe the openstack-hosted efforts
> >>> that aren't official projects. It may be too informal, but I do think
> >>> the OpenStack-Hosted vs. OpenStack might still mix up in people's head.
> >>
> >> My original thinking was to call them "hosted projects" or "host
> >> projects", but then it felt a bit incomplete. I kinda like the "Friends
> >> of OpenStack" name, although it seems to imply some kind of vetting that
> >> we don't actually do.
> > 
> > Why not bring back the name Stackforge and apply that
> > to unofficial projects? It’s short, descriptive, and unambiguous.
> 
> Just keep in mind that people always looked at stackforge projects as
> "immature 
> experimental projects". I remember getting questions "when is
> ironic-inspector 
> going to become a real project" because of our stackforge prefix back
> then, even 
> though it was already used in production.

A few days ago I suggested a variant of Thierry's suggestion below. Get
rid of the 'openstack' prefix entirely for hosting and use stackforge
for everything. Then officially governed OpenStack projects are hosted
just like any other project within infra under the stackforge (or Opium)
name. The problem with the current "flat" namespace is that OpenStack
means something specific and we have overloaded it for hosting. But we
could flip that upside down and host OpenStack within a different flat
namespace that represented "project hosting using OpenStack infra
tooling".

The hosting location isn't meant to convey anything beyond the project
is hosted on a Gerrit run by infra and tests are run by Zuul.
stackforge/ is not an (anti)endorsement (and neither is openstack/).

Unfortunately, I expect that doing this will also result in a bunch of
confusion around "why is OpenStack being renamed", "what is happening to
OpenStack governance", etc.

> >> An alternative would be to give "the OpenStack project infrastructure"
> >> some kind of a brand name (say, "Opium", for OpenStack project
> >> infrastructure ultimate madness) and then call the hosted projects
> >> "Opium projects". Rename the Infra team to Opium team, and voilà!
> >> -- 
> >> Thierry Carrez (ttx)

Clark