Ed Leafe wrote: > On Feb 16, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Doug Hellmann <d...@doughellmann.com> wrote: > >> When we signed off on the Big Tent changes we said competition >> between projects was desirable, and that deployers and contributors >> would make choices based on the work being done in those competing >> projects. Basically, the market would decide on the "optimal" >> solution. It's a hard message to hear, but that seems to be what >> is happening. > > This. > > We got much better at adding new things to OpenStack. We need to get better > at letting go of old things.
Yes. With the model we've built, it's difficult to move some project teams from "official" to "unofficial": as long as there is the remnants of a team working on a project, and this team is clearly made of OpenStack community members following our principles, our governance model does not leave many walls you can lean on. But there is one: does the project help with the OpenStack mission, or does it hurt it ? Some projects do fall below the level of maintenance/contribution necessary to present a satisfying experience, and keeping those in our blessed, official "mix" hurts us more than it helps us. Some other projects make us appear as (badly) trying to compete with successful other ecosystems, while we should just co-opt those ecosystems -- this also hurts us more than it helps us in achieving the OpenStack mission. It will be difficult discussions, but at this precise stage in OpenStack life we need to have them. Come talk to me next week if interested. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev