Open Stack

Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
> [...] 
> Yes, those are the inconsistency we currently have in the Skyline project, but that is not what they will stick to. In Yoga PTG[1], the skyline team iterates through all these points and plans to > improve those and be consistent with the other OpenStack projects. 
They said they will> work on packaging, PTI, using Oslo code etc.
Ultimately there is a chicken and egg situation there -- they need to 
work on making it more like OpenStack, but it's difficult to justify the 
time to work on this until it actually is accepted as an OpenStack project.

We should communicate expectations clearly, make sure that promises are 
made, and then there is a leap of faith. But IMHO it is a very small 
leap as the TC can still control if it should be included in the next 
release, and the TC can also remove the project team if it never gets 
where it needs to be.

> Boxiang Zhu mentioned the same in the governance patch also[2]. 
>
> If they deny moving Skyline towards the OpenStack way of packing, testing, using Oslo, etc., we should consider whether to reject the OpenStack official project or modify our new
> project application criteria. But this is not the case, and they agree to improve all those things.
> 
> Now we have more clear direction from them in the governance patch also, so I feel this is good
> to go as an official project, and while they will be in OpenStack, we all can help them to
> improve the things in OpenStack way.

I agree. Expectations have been clearly communicated. It's time for us 
to give them a good chance to meet those.

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)