Open Stack

In this case, statement by Mark below is inaccurate. Until BoD passes the
resolution for Heat to call itself, "OpenStack Orchestration" (which I
don't believe it has), Heat remains "an integrated project called Heat" and
NOT "OpenStack Orchestration"

Am I getting it right?


> *Can* the projects themselves use the word "OpenStack" such as
> "OpenStack Orchestration"? Answer: yes absolutely. This is already a
> done deal and we are already doing it in practice. And its covered
> under the bylaws once they are included in the integrated release by
> TC vote. There is no need for further action.


On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:56 AM, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org>wrote:

> Boris Renski wrote:
> > None of this answers the question of "what is currently the difference
> > between core and integrated." I agree with everything you said, but it
> > sounds to me like *integrated* = *core* at this point.
>
> Well, no.
>
> "Integrated" is the list of projects we produce and release together
> every 6 months. That's fully determined by the TC.
>
> "The Core OpenStack Project" as defined in the bylaws is the list of
> projects that can call themselves "OpenStack X". The TC recommends that
> it's the same as the list of integrated projects, but the BoD may decide
> to exclude some of those (since the bylaws grant them that power).
>
> And then there are all the other fun use cases for the word "core".
>
> So while there is definitely a relation between "Integrated" and one of
> the many use cases of the term "Core", I definitely wouldn't go as far
> as saying *integrated* = *core* at this point.
>
> --
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20131114/87b8e41b/attachment.html>