On 04/10/2017 02:26 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
On Apr 10, 2017, at 4:16 AM, Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org>
If there was ONE thing, one initiative, one change you will
actively push in the six months between this election round and the
next, what would it be ?

Just one? If I had to choose, I would like to see a clear separation
between the core services that provide IaaS, and the products that
then build on that core. They occupy very different places in the
OpenStack picture, and should be treated differently.


>  The IaaS parts
(and yes, I know that just which parts these are is a whole debate in
itself) should be rock-solid, slow-moving, and, well, boring.

A fine idea. Unfortunately, what the majority of end users keep asking for is yet more features, especially features that expose more and more internals of the infrastructure and hardware to the power user (admin or orchestrator).

Reliability is the key for them. But for the services and
applications that are built on top of this base? I'd like to see
allowing them a much more open approach: let them develop in whatever
language they like, release when they feel the timing is right, and
define their own CI testing. In other words, if you want to develop
in a language other than Python, go for it! If you want to use a
particular NoSQL database, sure thing! However, the price of that
freedom is that the burden will be on the project to ensure that it
is adequately tested, instead of laying that responsibility on our
infra team.

This is *precisely* what the Big Tent was all about: opening up the "what is an OpenStack project" idea to more newcomers and competing implementations with the condition that the shared cross-project teams like docs and infra would be enablers and not doers. Instead of creating infrastructure for all the new project teams, the infra team would transition to providing guidance for how the project teams should set up gate jobs for themselves. Instead of writing documentation for the project teams, the docs team would instead provide guidance to new teams on how to write docs that integrate effectively with the existing docs tooling.

The TC and the Big Tent didn't stop Freezer from making ElasticSearch its only metadata storage solution. Nobody stopped Gluon and other projects from using etcd for control plane communication and event notification. And nobody should be stopping these projects from innovating and experimenting.

As for the Python versus other languages bit, sure, the TC took some time to formulate its opinion regarding the impact another language would have on the OpenStack shared team workload but the Big Tent and the structure of the TC was not an impediment to discussion of other languages in the OpenStack ecosystem. Rather, preference for other (non-Gerrit) workflows and (non-IRC) communication methods continue to be the primary influencing factors for non-Python projects in the cloud space.

> Such projects will also have to accept a tag such as
'experimental' or 'untested' until they can demonstrate otherwise.

This already exists, in a much more fine-grained fashion, as originally designed into the concept of the Big Tent:


Are you just recommending that the TC controls more of those tags?

This can also serve to encourage the development of additional
testing resources around, say, Golang projects, so that the Golang
community can all pitch in and develop the sort of infrastructure
needed to adequately test their products, both alone and in
conjunction with the IaaS core of OpenStack. The only thing that
should be absolute is a project's commitment to the Four Opens. There
will be winners, and there will be losers, and that's not only OK,
it's how it should be.

I'm not grasping how the above doesn't already represent the state of the OpenStack governance world?


OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe

Reply via email to