Open Stack

On Aug 22, 2014, at 5:21 PM, Scheessele, Evan (Corvallis) <evan.scheessele at hp.com> wrote:

> Agreed re operators versus seeking a definition of users. Operators are essential of course, but users deserve their own clear voice too. As must as I'd like to leave the proposed users definition as constrained by "via its public APIs" I have to admit to knowing plenty of examples of users who work on deploying and supporting applications on top of an OpenStack cloud deployment via Heat's and others' CLIs, via Puppet and/or Cloudify, via FOG, and just directly via the Horizon web UI. Those aren't directly with the APIs by owned code, but still use the public (mostly) APIs underneath. 
> 
> This isn't refined language, but maybe something along these lines as to not exclude those packagers and integrators who we'd call 'users' but aren't coders:
> " An OpenStack end user is anyone who interacts with and makes use of an OpenStack cloud via its public APIs, directly via code or indirectly via abstraction or Horizon “

Note the part of the definition that says

"That is, anyone who develops, deploys, or maintains software that uses an OpenStack cloud via any technology that interacts with its public APIs.”

The key term there is “any technology”. All of the technologies you described above interact with OpenStack via its public APIs and hence are covered by the definition. I chose this language as to not exclude operators or packagers or integrators or anyone else who uses an OpenStack cloud via some technology (that ultimately uses the API to get its job done).

I’d prefer it if we didn’t stuff specific technologies like Horizon into the definition. It’s just another user of the API after all and is already covered by "any technology that interacts with its public APIs.”

Everett