Open Stack

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 05:41:18PM -0400, Brian Haley wrote:
> On 05/22/2018 04:57 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:

[...]

> > Please don't take this the wrong way, Dean, but you aren't seriously
> > suggesting that anyone outside of Windriver/Intel would ever contribute
> > to these repos are you?
> > 
> > What motivation would anyone outside of Windriver/Intel -- who must make
> > money on this effort otherwise I have no idea why they are doing it --
> > have to commit any code at all to StarlingX?

Yes, same question as Jay here.

What this product-turned-project (i.e. "Downstream First") is implicitly
asking for is the review time of the upstream community, which is
already at a premium -- for a fork.

> I read this the other way - the goal is to get all the forked code from
> StarlingX into upstream repos.  That seems backwards from how this should
> have been done (i.e. upstream first), and I don't see how a project would
> prioritize that over other work.
> 
> > I'm truly wondering why was this even open-sourced to begin with? I'm as
> > big a supporter of open source as anyone, but I'm really struggling to
> > comprehend the business, technical, or marketing decisions behind this
> > action. Please help me understand. What am I missing?
> 
> I'm just as confused.

Equally stupefied here.

> > My personal opinion is that I don't think that any products, derivatives
> > or distributions should be hosted on openstack.org infrastructure.

Yes, it should be unmistakably clear that contributions to "upstream
Nova", for example, means the 'primary' (this qualifier itself is
redundant) upstream Nova.  No slippery slope such as: "OpenStack-hosted
Nova, but not exactly _that_ OpenStack Nova".

-- 
/kashyap