+1000 very clearly. On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Dmitry Tantsur <dtant...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06/15/2017 11:56 AM, Neil Jerram wrote: > >> Just an immediate reaction: to me "OpenStack-Hosted projects" is not very >> distinct from "OpenStack projects". So with that terminology I think there >> will still be confusion (perhaps more). >> > > This was my reaction as well. For people who misunderstood official vs > unofficial, this is going to pose an even bigger challenge, I'm afraid. > > >> (Or did I misunderstand your new proposal?) >> >> Regards - Neil >> >> >> On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 10:16 AM Thierry Carrez <thie...@openstack.org >> <mailto:thie...@openstack.org>> wrote: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> Back in 2014, OpenStack was facing a problem. Our project structure, >> inherited from days where Nova, Swift and friends were the only game >> in >> town, was not working anymore. The "integrated release" that we ended >> up >> producing was not really integrated, already too big to be installed >> by >> everyone, and yet too small to accommodate the growing interest in >> other >> forms of "open infrastructure". The incubation process (from >> stackforge >> to incubated, from incubated to integrated) created catch-22s that >> prevented projects from gathering enough interest to reach the upper >> layers. Something had to give. >> >> The project structure reform[1] that resulted from those discussions >> switched to a simpler model: project teams would be approved based on >> how well they fit the OpenStack overall mission and community >> principles, rather than based on a degree of maturity. It was >> nicknamed >> "the big tent" based on a blogpost[2] that Monty wrote -- mostly >> explaining that things produced by the OpenStack community should be >> considered OpenStack projects. >> >> So the reform removed the concept of incubated vs. integrated, in >> favor >> of a single "official" category. Tags[3] were introduced to better >> describe the degree of maturity of the various official things. "Being >> part of the big tent" was synonymous to "being an official project" >> (but >> people kept saying the former). >> >> At around the same time, mostly for technical reasons around the >> difficulty of renaming git repositories, the "stackforge/" git >> repository prefix was discontinued (all projects hosted on OpenStack >> infrastructure would be created under an "openstack/" git repository >> prefix). >> >> All those events combined, though, sent a mixed message, which we are >> still struggling with today. "Big tent" has a flea market connotation >> of >> "everyone can come in". Combined with the fact that all git >> repositories >> are under the same prefix, it created a lot of confusion. Some people >> even think the big tent is the openstack/ namespace, not the list of >> official projects. We tried to stop using the "big tent" meme, but (I >> blame Monty), the name is still sticking. I think it's time to more >> aggressively get rid of it. We tried using "unofficial" and "official" >> terminology, but that did not stick either. >> >> I'd like to propose that we introduce a new concept: "OpenStack-Hosted >> projects". There would be "OpenStack projects" on one side, and >> "Projects hosted on OpenStack infrastructure" on the other side (all >> still under the openstack/ git repo prefix). We'll stop saying >> "official >> OpenStack project" and "unofficial OpenStack project". The only >> "OpenStack projects" will be the official ones. We'll chase down the >> last mentions of "big tent" in documentation and remove it from our >> vocabulary. >> >> I think this new wording (replacing what was previously Stackforge, >> replacing what was previously called "unofficial OpenStack projects") >> will bring some clarity as to what is OpenStack and what is beyond it. >> >> Thoughts ? >> >> [1] >> https://governance.openstack.org/tc/resolutions/20141202-pro >> ject-structure-reform-spec.html >> [2] http://inaugust.com/posts/big-tent.html >> [3] https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/tags/index.html >> >> -- >> Thierry Carrez (ttx) >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> ______________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.op >> enstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> ______________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscrib >> e >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- Shake Chen
__________________________________________________________________________ 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