Open Stack

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Mark Collier <mark at openstack.org> wrote:
>
> Strategic Member fees:  One small clarification: the proposal calls for
> Strategic Members to make a commitment of $500k/year for 5 years, paid
> annually (not up front). This figure was driven primarily by the need to
> arrive at a reasonable board size, while also raising substantial funds for
> foundation operations.

What do you do if more than than 5 companies pony up? What a good
problem to have! ;-)

Although 5 years align to ensure the longevity of the project, the
project is too young to sell away 5 years at this critical time in
strengthening the direction.

It should be desirable for the young companies who's success is
accelerating and are making an all-in strategic investment to be able
to make the same strategic contributions with the same benefits each
year --- natural incentives. This young blood shouldn't have to jockey
for two thirds of the remaining seats. With the success of OpenStack,
our foundations coffers will fill each year.

Joshua's proposal, our proposal (Piston Cloud), provides OpenStack
much more guaranteed resources as each of the say 15 members would be
providing 2 FTE = ~30, and the same financial characteristics. This
in-house investment formalizes the good behavior of committed
participants and brings home the OpenStack hats.

In this model seats are more easily lotteried each year among those
that are making the strategic investment, and we eliminate the unique
timing of the opportunity.

Better yet decouple the board all together from the benefits of
strategic membership -- why restrict full meritocracy to the
technical.


Thank you,
--
@lloyddewolf
http://www.pistoncloud.com/