Open Stack

Thierry,

Thanks for clarifying in your replies to me and Maish:

1. Who is providing is not the issue, but the what is being provided is. 
2. Irrespective of who is providing, there are two types of data - binary and structured.

Given this, I don’t think there is any reason not to converge into a single framework where both types of data are accommodated. 

Subbu


> On Jun 29, 2015, at 1:51 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> 
> Subbu Allamaraju wrote:
>> People will starting calling "tc this" and "uc that" only if we present
>> two sets of data. I think the right question to ask is why not present
>> one unified set, which was my original understanding when I read your
>> proposal last year. 
> 
> Subbu,
> 
> It was indeed our proposal -- provide data under the same framework.
> However, the ops workgroup decided to provide a totally different type
> of information that the TC provides, using its own framework. I totally
> respect your right to do that. But that created, in effect, two
> different sets.
> 
> I still think we can consider those two sets two different types of data
> provided under the same "project metadata" program. But they are
> different types of data. You build complex objective dictionaries of
> information around themes. We subjectively define precise labels that
> apply or do not apply. Calling them the same won't make them magically
> the same. It will just confuse people.
> 
> -- 
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators