Open Stack

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 10:48 AM, <Rob_Hirschfeld at dell.com> wrote:

> Stackers,
>
>
>
> I posted this first on my blog<http://robhirschfeld.com/2014/01/06/openstack-defcore/>(which is mirrored to Planet OpenStack) and want to make sure that we reach
> a broad audience with the information.  The Board heard very clearly that
> this was an important issues and we’re acting quickly to resolve it in
> transparent and community focused way.
>
>
> OpenStack Core Definition (DefCore) Progress in 6 key areas
>
>
>
> I’m excited to report about the OpenStack Board progress on defining
> OpenStack core <http://robhirschfeld.com/2013/11/22/defcore/>.  At the
> Hong Kong summit, Joshua McKenty<http://www.linkedin.com/in/joshuamckenty>
>  and I were asked to chair a new standing committee, now known as DefCore<https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/DefCoreCommittee>,
> to define “OpenStack Core” based on the core principles<http://robhirschfeld.com/2013/08/13/openstack-core-positions/>
>  that we determined over the last 6 months (aka “the spider<http://robhirschfeld.com/2013/07/23/introducing-the-openstack-spider-graph-untangling-our-web-of-interdependencies/>
> ”).
>
> Joshua and I took on the challenge with gusto and I’m proud to say that
> we’ve already made significant progress against an aggressive timeline to
> have the pilot must-pass tests for Havana defined before the Juno Summit
> in April 2014<http://www.openstack.org/summit/openstack-summit-atlanta-2014/>.
>  It’s important to remember that we’re moving from a project based
> definition of core to test-driven capabilities<http://robhirschfeld.com/2013/08/08/openstacks-test-driven-core-its-where-i-think-what-is-core-discussions-are-heading/>
>  because this best addresses our interoperability objectives<http://robhirschfeld.com/2013/04/10/openstack-interop/>
> .
>
>
>
> In the 8 weeks since the summit, we’ve had seven very productive meetings
> (etherpads for Prep<https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Core-Prekickoff-Agenda>
> , DefCore.1 <https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreElephant.1>,
> DefCore.2 <https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreElephant.2>, DefCore.3<https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreElephant.3>,
> Criteria 1 and 2 <https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/DefCoreTestCriteria>)
> with detailed notes and recorded content<https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3LSUWqq7Zq8eSIiFnDSrEvqK2o36iwDq>.
> Here’s my summary of our results so far:
>
> 1.      *An Aggressive Timeline* for having pilot Havana must-pass tests
> approved by the Juno summit in May 2014.  That drives the schedule backward
> toward a preliminary list in March.  Once we have a pilot list for Havana,
> we expect to have Ice House done +90 days and Juno done at the Paris summit.
>
> 2.      *Test Selection Criteria* a preliminary set of 14 criteria (needs
> a stand alone post) that will be used to quantitatively score the current
> 700+ tests.  We also agreed to use a max 100 point weighting system for the
> criteria.  The weights and score requirement iteratively once we have done
> a first scoring pass.  Our objective is to make must-pass test selection as
> objective and transparent as possible (post with details<http://robhirschfeld.com/2014/01/07/defcore-critieria/>
> ).
>
> 3.      *Distinction between Capability & Test* is important because we
> recognize that individual tests may validate multiple capabilities and
> individual capabilities may have multiple tests.  Our hope is to present
> the results in terms of capabilities not individual tests.
>
> 4.      *Holding Off on Bylaws Changes* needed to clarify how OpenStack
> manage core definition.  It was widely expected that the DefCore committee
> would have to make changes to the OpenStack bylaws; however, we believe we
> can proceed without rushing changes.  We have an active subcommittee
> preparing changes in advance of the next DefCore cycle.
>
> 5.      *Program vs. Project Definition* efforts are needed to help take
> pressure off requests to have “projects promoted to core status” and how
> the OpenStack trademark is used for projects.  We are trying to clarify
> OpenStack Programs (e.g.: OpenStack™ Compute) carry to the trademark while
> OpenStack Projects (e.g.: Nova and Glace) are members of those programs and
> do not carry the OpenStack trademark directly.  Consequently, we’d expect
> people to say “OpenStack Compute Project Nova” instead of “OpenStack Nova.”
>  This approach addresses several issues that impact DefCore Board
> activities around trademark, core and brand.
>

'OpenStack Compute Project Nova' is pretty wordy and confusing to a layman.


>   6.      *RefStack Development and Use Cases* provide the framework for
> community reporting of test results.  We consider this infrastructure
> critical to getting community input about must-pass tests and also sharing
> interoperability information.  This effort is just beginning and needs help
> from the community.
>
> For all this progress, we are only starting!  We’ve cleared the blocks
> preventing implementation and that will expose a new set issues to discuss.
>  Look for us to start applying the criteria to tests in the next months.
>  That will quickly expose the strengths and weaknesses of our criteria set.
>  We’ve also got to make progress on Program vs. Project and start RefStack
> coding.
>
> We want community participation!  Please let us know what you think
>
> Rob
>
> *______________________________*
>
> *Rob Hirschfeld*
>
> OpenStack Foundation Board Member, Sr. Distinguished Cloud Solution
> Architect
>
> *Dell* | Cloud Edge, Data Center Solutions
>
> *blog* robhirschfeld.com, *twitter* @zehicle
>
> Please note, I am based in the CENTRAL (-6) time zone
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list:
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
> Post to     : openstack at lists.openstack.org
> Unsubscribe :
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20140109/9cdaecc2/attachment.html>