Open Stack

On Tue, 2015-03-17 at 23:24 +1100, Roland Chan wrote:
> There's a fair bit of merit in the argument that the concept of production
> ready is very hard to define and harder to enforce, especially as the code
> base grows larger.

I made a proposal on the -dev list[1] that may have been lost in the
volume of emails and probably this group is appropriate to review.

The gist of my message is that while the concept of 'stability' or
'maturity' of code is way too subjective to be defined (as many have
already said) there are objective indicators that can be used to give
end users elements to judge for themselves.

Decision makers want to have elements to decide if the software they're
evaluating is 'good enough for them'. For this, the EU has invested a
lot of euros (for example [2]) to find out about indicators for quality
of open source software. I think the results of that research can be
used in our case. 

In the message to the -dev list I suggested a few tags that can be used
by a decision maker in a software selection process to understand if,
for example, how nova and murano compare to each other in terms of
popularity, stability, levels of support available, etc. 

If someone checks and notices that Nova has chapters in books, has 99%
string translation in 10+ languages, 10+ companies contributing to 80%
of its code, project started 5+ years ago... While Murano has less than
that... 

That information, in tags, on a good-looking page, would provide a much
clearer overview to decision makers, IMHO. Those tags are only a brief
representation of facts, no subjective judgment and yet, taken together
they can help people understand what they're getting.

Thoughts?

/stef

[1]
http://www.mail-archive.com/openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org/msg47889.html


[2]
http://www.ict-prose.eu/2014/12/09/osseval-prose-open-source-evaluation-methodology-and-tool/